ganga water pollution research paper

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings
My Bibliography
Collections
Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

Create a new collection
Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

Search in PubMed
Search in NLM Catalog
Add to Search

Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of Ganga basin

Affiliations.

1 Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow 226001, India.
2 Plant Ecology and Environmental Science Division, CSIR-National Botanical Research Institute, Rana Pratap Marg, Lucknow 226001, India. Electronic address: [email protected].
PMID: 29783191
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.05.015

Background: The water quality of Ganga, the largest river in Indian sub-continent and life line to hundreds of million people, has severely deteriorated. Studies have indicated the presence of high level of carcinogenic elements in Ganga water.

Objectives: We performed extensive review of sources and level of organic, inorganic pollution and microbial contamination in Ganga water to evaluate changes in the level of various pollutants in the recent decade in comparison to the past and potential health risk for the population through consumption of toxicant tainted fishes in Ganga basin.

Methods: A systematic search through databases, specific websites and reports of pollution regulatory agencies was conducted. The state wise level of contamination was tabulated along the Ganga river. We have discussed the major sources of various pollutants with particular focus on metal/metalloid and pesticide residues. Bioaccumulation of toxicants in fishes of Ganga water and potential health hazards to humans through consumption of tainted fishes was evaluated.

Results: The level of pesticides in Ganga water registered a drastic reduction in the last decade (i.e. after the establishment of National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA) in 2009), still the levels of some organochlorines are beyond the permissible limits for drinking water. Conversely the inorganic pollutants, particularly carcinogenic elements have increased several folds. Microbial contamination has also significantly increased. Hazard quotient and hazard index indicated significant health risk due to metal/metalloid exposure through consumption of tainted fishes from Ganga. Target cancer risk assessment showed high carcinogenic risk from As, Cr, Ni and Pb as well as residues of DDT and HCHs.

Conclusion: Current data analysis showed that Ganga water quality is deteriorating day by day and at several places even in upper stretch of Ganga the water is not suitable for domestic uses. Although there is positive impact of ban on persistent pesticides with decreasing trend of pesticide residues in Ganga water, the increasing trend of trace and toxic elements is alarming and the prolong exposure to polluted Ganga water and/or consumption of Ganga water fishes may cause serious illness including cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

Elsevier Science

Other Literature Sources

scite Smart Citations
MedlinePlus Health Information

Research Materials

NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Program

Miscellaneous

NCI CPTAC Assay Portal
Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

We apologize for the inconvenience...

To ensure we keep this website safe, please can you confirm you are a human by ticking the box below.

If you are unable to complete the above request please contact us using the below link, providing a screenshot of your experience.

https://ioppublishing.org/contacts/

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Open access
Published: 21 February 2022

Physicochemical and biological analysis of river Yamuna at Palla station from 2009 to 2019

Pankaj Joshi 1 ,
Akshansha Chauhan 2 ,
Piyush Dua 3 ,
Sudheer Malik 4 &
Yuei-An Liou 2 , 5

Scientific Reports volume 12 , Article number: 2870 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

8211 Accesses

14 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

Environmental sciences

Yamuna is one of the main tributaries of the river Ganga and passes through Delhi, the national capital of India. In the last few years, it is considered one of the most polluted rivers of India. We carried out the analysis for the physiochemical and biological conditions of the river Yamuna based on measurements acquired at Palla station, Delhi during 2009–19. For our analysis, we considered various physicochemical and biological parameters (Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Saturation, Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Total Alkalinity, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), and Total Coliform. The water stats of river Yamuna at Palla station were matched with Water Standards of India, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), and World Health Organization (WHO). Maximum changes are observed in DO saturation and total coliform, while BOD and COD values are also seen higher than the upper limits. Total alkalinity rarely meets the minimum standards. TDS is found to be satisfactory as per the standard limit. The river quality falls under Class D or E (IS2296), Class III or IV (UNECE), and fails to fulfill WHO standards for water. After spending more than 130 million USD for the establishment of a large number of effluent treatment plants, sewage treatment plants, and common effluent treatment plants, increasing discharges of untreated sewage, partially treated industrial effluents and reduced discharge of freshwater from Hathnikund are causing deterioration in water quality and no major improvements are seen in water quality of river Yamuna.

Positive effects of COVID-19 lockdown on river water quality: evidence from River Damodar, India

Hydro-chemical characterization and irrigation suitability assessment of a tropical decaying river in India

Assessing heavy metal and physiochemical pollution load of Danro River and its management using floating bed remediation

Introduction.

Water is the main need of human life. The majority of ancient civilizations were developed on the bank of major rivers across the world. Rivers fulfill the major demands of the freshwater supply from drinking to agriculture. In the northern parts of India, the Yamuna River basin is ranked the second largest basin after the Ganga River. It is the second-largest tributary of the river Ganga (the longest river of India) with a total catchment area of 345,848 km 2 and it originates at Yamunotri Glacier, Uttrakhand, India at a height of 6387 m 1 . It covers a total distance of 1376 km through four major states of India: Uttarakhand, Haryana, Delhi, and Uttar Pradesh, and finally confluences with river Ganga at Triveni Sangam, Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. Although it does not flow through Himachal Pradesh but receives water via the river Tons (which originates in Himachal Pradesh). The other tributaries of the river Yamuna are Chambal, Sindh, Betwa, and Ken 2 , 3 . The water abstracted from the river is mostly used for irrigation (about 94%), while 4% for domestic water supply and the remaining 2% for industrial and other uses 4 .

During the last few decades, Yamuna has been considered one of the most polluted rivers of India. Discharge from industries, partially or untreated sewage, and agricultural waste are the main sources for the river Yamuna degradation 5 , 6 , 7 . Almost 85% of the total pollution in the river Yamuna is due to domestic sources mainly from urban cities Sonipat, Panipat, Delhi, Ghaziabad, Mathura, Agra, Etawah, and Prayagraj. Industrial zones at various places like Yamunanagar, Panipat, Ghaziabad, Delhi, Noida, Faridabad, and Baghpat which are in the upper Yamuna basin (Fig. 1 ), comprise industries like Oil refineries, distilleries, pulp, pharmaceutical, chemical, electroplating, weaving, and sugar, and contribute to the degradation of Yamuna water quality significantly 8 , 9 . According to Kumar et al. 10 , Delhi leads the list of cities with 79% pollution load in river Yamuna followed by Agra and Mathura with a contribution of 9% and 4%, respectively, whereas a pollution load of 2% by Sonipat and Baghpat. The annual mixing of sewage from domestic and industrial sources in the Yamuna River basin is about 9.63 km 3 , 11 . In the last few decades, a sudden rise in the built-up and cropland areas is observed in the Yamuna River basin (Fig. 2 ). Kumar et al. 10 suggested a rise of 100% in the urbanization in Haryana and Rajasthan states and significant fall is observed in wetland, grassland, water bodies and forest areas of Yamuna River basin. The green revolution in India helped rise in the productivity of various crops, but the major water supply to the crop depends on the groundwater. The DO level of water in Delhi stretch shows a sudden fall due to high carbon level so that most of the time the river can not sustain fishery.

( Source : HSPCB).

River Yamuna in Haryana.

( Source : WRIS).

Upper river Yamuna basin area.

Parween et al. 12 showed the positive rise in the potassium and nitrate that affected the Yamuna River basin. Domestic waste consists of mainly organic matter and micro-organisms along with detergents, grease and total salts mixed in river Yamuna through various drainages in National Capital region. Lokhande and Tare 3 have shown rise in the flow rate of Yamuna during non-monsoon months due to the sewage water. Industrial effluents are the main source of heavy metal pollution like Cd, As, Cr, Fe and Zn with other inorganic and organic wastes adding to pollutant inventory 10 . According to National Capital Region Planning Board (NCRPB) report, sewage generation in Haryana was 374 MLD in 2001, and 599 MLD in 2011, whereas the sewage treatment capacity was 164 MLD in 2001 and 199 MLD in 2011. State monitoring committee appointed by National Green Tribunal (NGT) 2019 suggested that Haryana discharged 1140 MLD of untreated or partially treated sewage per day into river Yamuna, also 1268 industrial units discharged 138.75 MLD partially treated and another 827 units discharged 48.319 MLD of treated effluents per day in Yamuna River 13 .

Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) is responsible for controlling the various sources of pollution in India and also monitoring water quality of the rivers with the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) 4 , 5 , 14 , 15 . CPCB started national water quality monitoring in 1978 under Global Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS), followed by the Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources (MINARS) in 1984, and helped reduce river pollution via National Water Quality Monitoring Programme (NWMP) 16 . Central Water Commission (CWE) is monitoring the water quality of all the major river basins in India through 519 water quality sites and 33 water sampling stations. According to CWC, the water quality of river Yamuna is monitored at 18 different stations of which 12 are manual and 6 are telemetry stations, starting from Naugaon (N-30.78, E-78.13) at Uttarakhand as the first river point station to the last river point station Pratappur (N-25.37, E-81.67) Uttar Pradesh.

Due to degradation in the water quality of the Yamuna River, Yamuna Action Plan (YAP-I) was launched in 1993 by the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF), India to rejuvenate the Yamuna River especially in the Delhi segment having maximum pollution load. Haryana and Uttar Pradesh were also included along with Delhi in YAP-II in 2003. YAP-III, with an estimated cost of Rs.1656 crore, was launched in 2018 as an integrated component of the Namami Gange Mission 17 . The river Yamuna is analyzed monthly, seasonally, and yearly for its physical, chemical, and biological properties in previous research for various states and cities influenced by it or small stretches of river 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 . A sufficient amount of literature is available for the water quality of Yamuna and most of the analysis focused on the Delhi and stations lie after the Delhi’s. Kumar et al. 10 discussed the variability of various water quality parameters from 1999 to 2005 to investigate the relationship between environmental parameters and pollution sources. Kaur et al. 22 discussed the impact of industrial development and land use/land cover changes over the Yamuna water quality in Panipat, which is located between the Hathnikund and Baghpat stretch. The sampling was carried out during February, July, October, and December, 2018 to observe the variations in the quality of water and the impact of pollutants on the river Yamuna. Patel et al. 23 carried out the water quality analysis over the Yamuna River using satellite and remote sensing during the lockdown period and compared it with the water quality parameter before the lockdown. The analysis was carried out from January 2020 to April 2021. The impact of lockdown on the water quality was discussed assuming that the industrial waste and the other pollutants sources were reduced during the time of lockdown. Paliwal et al. 24 carried out the modeling analysis of the Yamuna water quality for the Delhi stretch. They emphasize the inflow of untreated water and effluents from various drains in the Yamuna in the Delhi stretch using QUAL2E-UNCAS before 2007. They also highlighted the need for common treatment plants and a rise in freshwater supply. Krishan et al. 25 conducted the groundwater study near the bank of the Yamuna in the Agra and Mathura districts. The study area is located downstream of Delhi and affected by severe falls in water quality. The change in the water quality at Agra and Mathura was discussed and the assessment of the treated water after the filtration was discussed. Kaur et al. 26 investigated the Yamuna water quality at the Delhi stretch and one site located near the Yamunotri. The analyses were implemented during March and October for 2017 and 2018. They have discussed the impact of the inflow of pollutants from the Delhi and NCR regions in the Yamuna. Jaiswal et al. 21 carried out the multivariate study of the Yamuna river water to study the river water quality across the whole stretch. The samples were collected from July to October and November to June for 2013 and 2014. The analysis suggested that the water quality of Palla was suitable for drinking during the study period. We found that these analyses were mostly carried out for a short period in recent years. Some long-term analyses were carried out before 2007. So, there is a dire need for long-term analysis in recent years. In recent times, Lokhande and Tare 3 performed the first long-term analysis of various water quality parameters of the river Yamuna and discussed the trends of various parameters. Due to classified data, Lokhande and Tare 3 were not able to quantify the monthly variations of various water parameters. Hence, these analyses, lack the long-term variability discussion and quantitative changes. In the current study, we conducted monthly and annual mean analysis of various physical and biological parameters, including Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen demand (COD), Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Saturation, Total Alkalinity, Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Coliform and average rainfall from 2009 to 2019 at Palla station located at northwestern Delhi. We have shown the quantitative change in the physiochemical and biological parameters of the river Yamuna at the Palla station, which is mostly affected by the pollutants load of the watershed of Haryana. We compared the results with the water quality guidelines of national and international standards given in Table 1 to figure out the changes in water quality of river Yamuna at Palla station in the last 11 years. The current water quality at Palla is not suitable for drinking and sometimes not good for agricultural purposes due to the high influx of water pollutants.

The river Yamuna enters National Capital Territory (NCT) at approximately 1.5 km before village Palla, which is 23 km upstream of the Wazirabad barrage. Palla station (N-28.82 and E-77.22) is a manual type station with zero gauges at 206 m. Before entering NCT at Palla, the river Yamuna traveled about 393 km from its source and about 220 km from the Hatnikund barrage. According to Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB), the numbers of industries in Yamunanagar, Kernal, Panipat, and Sonipat are 142, 9, 346, and 503, generating effluent of 16,420.90, 26.00, 65,696.97, and 15,668.50 KLD, respectively, up to August 2019. As in Fig. 3 , several drains of Haryana state including 3 major drains at Dhanaura escape, Main Drain No.2, and Drain No. 8 also fallout in river Yamuna before reaching Palla 28 (Figs. 3 , 11 ).

Location of Palla station. The base image is provided by ESRI and projection is done using ArcGIS Pro.

Data retrieval

Water quality data of Yamuna River at Palla station was obtained from Water Resources and Information System (WRIS), India, which is a centralized platform, acting as a database related to all water resources at the national or state level. It was initiated by CWC along with the Ministry of Water Resources, Ministry of Jal Shakti, and Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) in 2008 to provide a single-window solution to all water resources data and information in a standardized national GIS framework 29 . Depending upon the availability of monthly average data, the parameters BOD, COD, DO saturation, total alkalinity, TDS, and total coliform at Palla station were analyzed during the period from January 2009 to December 2019. The rainfall data was procured from the Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2) and available on the website http://www.soda-pro.com/web-services/meteo-data/merra . The spatial resolution of data is 0.50° × 0.625° and the time step ranges from 1 min to 1 month 30 , 31 . We also included the water discharge data in the current study of three locations Hathnikund Barrage, Baghpat, and Delhi Railway Bridge (DRB) stations. The freshwater in river Yamuna reached to the Palla station is controlled at the Hathnikund Barrage. Baghpat station is located just before the Palla station (no data is available at Palla station) and DRB is located after the Palla station. These stations are chosen based on the availability of data and the locations to show the water discharge in the Yamuna. The water discharge data of this location is taken from the Central Pollution Control Board of India ( https://yamuna-revival.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Final-Report-of-YMC-29.06.2020.pdf ).

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The paper did not involve any human participants.

Result and discussion

Analysis of various parameters related to the water quality of river Yamuna at Palla station was carried out.

The annual mean variation in rainfall at the Palla region (Fig. 4 a) suggested that the highest annual mean rainfall (95.8 mm) occurred during the year 2010. After 2010, the yearly average rainfall continuously declined every year till 2014 with a mean value of 17.9 mm. Although from 2014 to 2018, a rise in average rainfall was observed each year and during 2018, the average rainfall was calculated as 53.1 mm, but the linear trend illustrated a sharp decline in average rainfall between 2009 and 2019 as shown in Fig. 4 a.

( a ) Yearly mean rainfall at Palla station and adjacent region from 2009 to 2019. The red line shows a linear trend of rainfall. ( b ) Rainfall monthly distribution at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of rainfall from 2009 to 2019.

The box plot in Fig. 4 b shows the rainfall data of each month during 2009–2019. The distribution suggested that the monthly mean rainfall variations were highest during August along with July and September. May was an almost driest month along with April and March as the rainfall was minimum during these months. The highest values of average rainfall for August, September, and July were 515.28, 233.45, 207.99 mm respectively, whereas these months’ minimum average rainfalls were 101.74, 61.95, and 72.76 mm, respectively, during 2009 and 2019. The median values of rainfall during March, April, October, and November were below 10 mm and, during January, February, June, and December, the median values were between 10 and 20 mm, while the median values for July, August, and September were above 60 mm.

The monthly mean variation of rainfall (2009–19) further elaborates the stats of rainfall in the Palla region. From 2009 to 2019 rainfall data showed various ups and downs in monthly rainfall (Fig. 4 c). In India, the onset of monsoon is observed during the start of June each year in the coastal part of India, which lasts approximately for a period of four months (June to September) each year. The northern parts of India receive major rainfall during this period, which is known as the monsoon season. During June, the average rainfall remained lower than the decadal mean during 2014–2019 except for 2017. During July, we observed the same deficit of rainfall during 2014–2019 except in 2018. The major deficit in rainfall was observed for August from 2012 to 2018 whereas, during August 2019, the rainfall remained higher than the decadal mean value. During September, the rainfall deficit was observed from 2012 to 2016. Hence, during 2012–2017, we observed a significant fall in the monsoon rainfall. The winter rainfall is also observed during January and February in northern parts of India. We also observed a significant fall in the winter rainfall for January and February since 2014. Yamuna River before Palla station receives runoff water from cities like Sonipat, Panipat, Karnal, and Yamunanagar. The rainfall statistics of Haryana analyzed by India Meteorological Department (IMD) between 1989 and 2018 showed annual rainfalls of 1053.5, 578.8, 573.9, and 495.3 mm at Yamunanagar, Sonipat, Karnal, and Panipat districts, respectively 32 . During the monsoon season, sudden changes in physicochemical and biological parameters were observed by various researchers. The addition of monsoon runoff in rivers dilutes the industrial effluent and sewage, causing the decline in parameters like BOD, COD, alkalinity, pH, and conductivity 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 . The catchment area of Yamuna is the smallest in Delhi. The size of the catchment area of the river is an important factor for the dilution of anthropogenic waste in river water. The small catchment area increases soil components in the river and makes difficult the dilution process of anthropogenic waste 37 . These conditions can further affect the river water quality. Hence, we further analyzed the variations in the various physical and biological parameters for each month from 2009 to 2019.

Dissolved oxygen (DO) saturation

Dissolved Oxygen (DO) saturation is a vibrant parameter for aquatic system health determination. The pollutants like sewage, soil, agricultural runoff, and other organic pollutants can reduce the DO saturation of water 38 and low DO saturation can impact the life of major aquatic organisms. The water having DO < 5% of saturation lies in an extremely severe pollution region; DO between 5 and 10% of saturation lies in severe pollution; DO in a range of 10–70% represents moderate pollution, whereas DO above 70% indicates slightly or no pollution condition. Heavy pollution load due to untreated sewage and industrial effluents are the main causes of decreasing DO concentration 39 . Value of DO saturation is also affected by the change in water salinity (chlorine), temperature, and air pressure.

Increasing pollution in the Yamuna River caused a decrease in DO saturation concentration along with an increase in temperature and salinity of water 3 . Figure 5 shows the yearly variation of DO saturation, and monthly distribution and mean variation of DO saturation at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. In recent years, the annual mean value of DO saturation during 2017–19 was found to be 4.81%. From 2009 to 2011, the mean DO saturation was found to be 69.49% with a maximum value (81.58%) in 2010. From 2012 to 2015, the yearly mean DO saturation was 86.48%. During this period, a small decrease was seen between 2013 and 2015. In recent years, the DO saturation reached critically low values to the average value before 2015 as demonstrated in Fig. 5 a. These conditions indicate the rise in pollutants in the river Yamuna.

( a ) Yearly variation of DO saturation from 2009 to 2019. The red line shows a linear trend of DO saturation. ( b ) Monthly distribution of DO saturation at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of DO (%) saturation from 2009 to 2019.

The monthly distribution of DO saturation during 2009–2019 is shown in Fig. 5 b with boxes ranging from 25 to 75%. During May, the maximum median value was 88%, whereas in January minimum median value was about 25%. Similarly, the maximum monthly mean value was 62.7% during May, while the minimum mean value was 34.1% during January. Similarly, maximum DO saturation of 118% was perceived for May, while a minimum of 2.4% was observed for December. The monthly mean distribution suggested that the mean DO saturation plunged between 50 and 60% with a slight growth in trend from January to December. We further showed the monthly mean values of DO saturation in Fig. 5 c. From 2009 to 2015, the values suggested no major changes with monthly values well above 50, but just after 2017, a sudden fall was observed in the DO saturation each month. We observed 10 times fall in DO saturation just after 2017. During 2009–14, the DO saturation of Yamuna River at Palla station was Class I category of international standards for surface water of UNECE, but during 2016–19 its quality degraded to Class IV due to regular fall in the DO values of the river water. The lack of fresh water and rising carbon concentration have affected the DO concentration significantly.

Biological oxygen demand (BOD)

Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) is one of the methods to assess the quality of water by calculating the oxygen requirement for decomposition of its organic matter. The yearly variations in BOD at Palla station during 2009–19 are shown in Fig. 6 a. The yearly mean BODs in 2009 and 2010 were estimated to be around 6 mg/l, while, during 2013 and 2012, the least values of BOD (1.4 and 2.7 mg/l, respectively) were found. The year 2015 showed the highest yearly mean BOD value of around 12 mg/l followed by years 2014 and 2016 with a value of about 9.5 mg/l. The decline in yearly mean BOD was observed from 2015 to 2019. In particular, a BOD of 3.5 mg/l was perceived for years 2018 and 2019. The monthly variation of BOD during 2009–19 was shown in Fig. 6 b, where the interquartile range for each month was between 25 and 75 percentiles. The first quartile for all months lay below the range between 0 and 5 mg/l, with outliers for months May, July, October, and December with BOD above 20 mg/l. January and February had the highest median value of BOD at 6.7 mg/l, while September had the least median value of 2.1 mg/l.

( a ) Temporal variation of yearly mean BOD from 2009 to 2019. The red line shows a linear trend of BOD. ( b ) Monthly distribution of BOD at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of BOD from 2009 to 2019.

The median value for April, June, July, October, and December lay between 3 and 5 mg/l. The monthly mean BOD during 2009–19 represented that BOD was maximum in December (8.9 mg/l) followed by the second highest mean value of 8 mg/l in May. The minimum mean value of 2.7 mg/l was found in August, while in April, September, October, and November, the mean BOD lay between 3 and 6 mg/l. Mean BOD from January to March and in July was in the range of 6–7.5 mg/l.

The fluctuation in BOD was observed during 2009–19 in Fig. 6 c. In January, February, and March, a decrease in BOD occurred during 2009–13, while in May, June, and July increase in BOD was seen during 2013–16. In August, September, and October, BOD mostly fell below 5 mg/l throughout the study period. The highest BOD values were measured in December 2015, October 2014, and July 2016 (41.6, 26.5, and 24.8 mg/l, respectively). The decreasing trend was observed for January, February, and July, with a rising trend for March, April, May, and November. From 2014 to 2016, the BOD values were found to be several times higher than the acceptable limits. In March and April, BOD values were less than 4, and else BOD was higher than 4 even in monsoon months. In years 2018–19, BOD is observed to be mostly ≤ 4 mg/l. However, the overall BOD values suggest that the water quality of Yamuna mostly lay beyond the C category (BIS) as the BOD values are mostly > 4 mg/l. To attain river quality standard it has to be ≤ 3 mg/l.

Chemical oxygen demand (COD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) determines the amount of oxygen required for the oxidation of organic matter present in water. We have shown the changes in COD at Palla station in Fig. 7 . Yearly mean COD varied indistinctly during 2009–19 even though the linear trend has moved upward with increasing year as shown in Fig. 7 a. The yearly mean COD increased from 15.9 to 30.8 mg/l during 2010–2012 and from 11.5 to 44.3 mg/l during 2013- 2015. Mean COD for the years 2018 and 2019 was 15.1 and 20.4 mg/l, respectively. The highest yearly mean COD was 44.33 mg/l for the year 2015 followed by the year 2012 with 30.8 mg/l, while the least mean COD value was observed in 2013 as 11.5 mg/l. A sharp decline in yearly mean COD was noted during the years 2012–13 and 2015–16. The monthly data of each month during 11 years period is shown in Fig. 7 b. The width between the first and third quartiles for January, April, and May indicated maximum variation in COD values. The September quartile indicated less variation in COD as compared with the other months. The CODs for January and May had the highest median values of 27 and 24.5 mg/l, respectively, whereas April had the least median value of 8 mg/l. The median CODs for March, August, September, October, and November lay in the range of 11–16 mg/l. We found that the monthly mean CODs of May and November had maximum and minimum values of 33.9 and 14.2 mg/l, respectively.

( a ) Yearly variation of COD from 2009 to 2019. The red line shows a linear trend of COD. ( b ) Monthly distribution of COD saturation at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of COD from 2009 to 2019.

The trend of COD followed a decreasing path moving from January to December. The monthly mean CODs of January, February, and May were found to be higher than 30 mg/l whereas for April, June, and October they lay between 20 and 30 mg/l, and for the remaining months mean COD was found to be lesser than 20 mg/l. A decline in the mean COD was observed from May to August, with a sharp increase in mean COD from March to May.

Figure 7 c shows changing COD for each month as the year preceding. From 2009 to 2012, the COD values for January, February, March, and April were higher than 30 mg/l, whereas, since 2017, the COD values were seen well below 30 mg/l during these months. In May, an exceptional high COD of 125 mg/l was observed and for the same month, a continuous increase in COD was noted from the years 2013 to 2016. Also, the rise in COD was seen for June, August, October, and December during 2012–15. Excluding May, February, April, and September had maximum CODs of 85, 78, and 67 mg/l, respectively. During 2009–19, January and June to November showed a growing linear trend, whereas the rest of the months had a declining trend. Compared with the international standards, the annual and monthly mean CODs exceeded the WHO guideline and were classified as Classes III-V of UNECE standards. Also, the values were found well above the threshold value. During the years 2009, 2012, and 2013, the monsoon period showed COD value in Class II, while, during the overall monsoon period, water quality lay in Class III. During the year 2015, Yamuna, in terms of COD, was in the worst condition as it lied in Class V. Monthly variation COD for 2018–19 rarely plunged under WHO standards and represented to be in Classes III and IV.

Total alkalinity

Total alkalinity is mostly due to calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ) and also important for sustaining aquatic life. The yearly mean variation of total alkalinity during 2009–19 is shown in Fig. 8 a. Total alkalinity was found to be the highest during 2015 followed by 2011 with values of 187.37 and 164.6 mg/l, respectively, while, for the rest of the year, the annual means were in the range of 110–150 mg/l. The linear trend for the yearly mean for the entire period remained constant. With these values of total alkalinity, the quality of river water lay in category II (UNECE 1994).

( a ) Yearly variation of total alkalinity from 2009 to 2019. The red line shows a linear trend of total alkalinity. ( b ) Monthly variation of total alkalinity from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of total alkalinity from 2009 to 2019.

We have shown the monthly distribution of total alkalinity in Fig. 8 b with the third quartile of each month lying below the mark of 200 mg/l. The median values dropped from January to July and then raised from July to December. The monthly mean total alkalinities in February and January showed the first and second-highest median values of 159.8 and 155.5 mg/l, respectively, while July and June showed the lowest median values of 86.5 and 88.9 mg/l, respectively. Median values during May, August, and September lay in the range of 90–100 mg/l, while for March, October, November, and December they were between 100 and 150 mg/l. The linear trend for monthly mean total alkalinity also followed the same pattern as the yearly mean. The total alkalinity declined from January to May from 159.4 to 105.5 mg/l and, then from August to December, it raised from 93.8 to 170.7 mg/l. August and December showed the lowest and highest values of total alkalinity, respectively.

The monthly variation in total alkalinity for each year during 2009–19 is shown in Fig. 8 c. June (2015), November (2011), and December (2015) were the months with the highest total alkalinities of 723.3, 569.9, and 428.1 mg/l, respectively. During 2009–19, total alkalinities for February, March, May, July to September remained within 200 mg/l. The lowest total alkalinity of around 55 mg/l was noticed for June (2010) and July (2012). Although the linear trend for monthly total alkalinity showed almost the same slope except for January, July, and November. A wave pattern in total alkalinity for August, September, and October was noticed with an increasing trend during 2009–19. In 2019, the total alkalinity was below 150 mg/l throughout the year 2019. For maintaining WHO and BIS standards, the minimum total alkalinity must be 200 mg/l, while it was not possible to fulfill the standards for both monthly and yearly aspects in the study areas of concern. There were only a few months when total alkalinity was found to be higher than 200. Comparing with UNECE standard, 11 out of 12 monthly mean alkalinities lay in Class II and the remaining one month in Class III category. March 2018 was the last month since 2018 when Yamuna's total alkalinity was well above-mentioned the water standards.

Total dissolved solids (TDS)

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) define the presence of inorganic compounds along with organic matter in small concentrations originated by naturally, household, and industrial sources. The data was available from 2013 onwards. The yearly mean TDS was found to be highest in 2015 (447 mg/l) followed by 2017 and 2018 with 421 mg/l (Fig. 9 a). The lowest yearly mean TDS was observed as 256 mg/l in 2010, while the recent value of 272 mg/l was observed in 2019. Although the linear trend for yearly TDS indicated the rise in overall TDS. A maximum drop in yearly TDS was observed with a fall of 36% during 2018–19.

( a ) Yearly variation of TDS from 2013 to 2019. The Red line shows a linear trend of TDS. ( b ) Monthly variation of TDS from 2013 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of TDS from 2013 to 2019.

The 25 to 75 percentiles of interquartile range of all twelve months for TDS are shown in Fig. 9 b. Although March had the maximum width of interquartile range, the maximum median value of TDS was 678 mg/l for January. Except for August and October, the median TDS values for the rest of the months lay in the range of 200–400 mg/l. August had the lowest median TDS of 162 mg/l and October had 404 mg/l. A sharp decline in the trend of monthly mean TDS was observed during 2013–19, but mean TDS fluctuated throughout the year. Similarly, with median TDS, the monthly mean TDS for January and August had maximum-minimum mean values of 628.3 and 177.57 mg/l, respectively. Except for August, the monthly mean values of TDS were above the mark of 200 mg/l. From April to July, they lay in the range of 300–400 mg/l, while in February, March, and December, they ranged between 400 and 500 mg/l.

In February and March, TDS had a higher magnitude of rising, while it appeared to be almost constant in August as shown in Fig. 9 c. In January, TDS was measured as 732 mg/l in 2014 and dropped to its lowest point of 310 mg/l in the next year, but then it reached 998 mg/l in 2017. The TDS values during June were well below the mark of 300 mg/l from 2009 to 2019, but during June 2015, the monthly mean TDS was found to be 1333 mg/l. This was the maximum value of TDS during the whole study period. For the same year, the second-highest TDS of 1067 mg/l was also observed in December. TDS remained mostly below 300 mg/l for August and September (mostly during monsoon months) with the lowest TDS of 128 mg/l in August 2017. In 2019, the TDS value mostly ranged between 200 and 300 mg/l. Yearly and monthly mean values of TDS were observed almost under WHO standards and in the Class A category of Indian standards. The TDS value was found below 500 mg/l during each monsoon season. During winter, summer, and post-monsoon months, the TDS of river water never exceeded the Class C category as per BIS standard and during January, the monthly mean average remained higher in comparison to other months.

Total coliform

Human and animal discharges are the main source of fecal coliform bacteria whose excessive presence in water degrades the water quality. During 2009–19, there was an exponential rise in total coliform as shown in Fig. 10 a. The yearly mean in 2009 was 177 MPN/100 ml, which in the decade reached 139,200 MPN/100 ml in 2019. The difference of yearly mean for two periods of 2009–13 and 2016–19 was more than 100 times the value at its starting period. The year 2018 was observed with the highest yearly mean of 490,818 MPN/100 ml, which was reduced in 2019, with the lowest total coliform count of 136.7 MPN/100 ml in 2010. Note that the years 2014–15 were excluded from comparison for this case due to less availability of data for the whole year.

( a ) Yearly variation of total coliform from 2009 to 2019. Redline shows an exponential trend of total coliform. ( b ) Monthly variation of total coliform from 2009 to 2019. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of total coliform from 2009 to 2019.

Figure 10 b shows a large monthly variation in total coliform in each month during 2009–19. The median of most of the months was below 500 MPN/100 ml, whereas median values were 1050, 620, and 16,775 MPN/100 ml for September, October, and November, respectively. The monthly mean for January, February, March, April, June, and October was above 100,000 MPN/100 ml. Maximum and minimum monthly means were observed for October (133,797 MPN/100 ml) and May (12,663 MPN/100 ml), respectively.

Figure 10 c indicates the exponential rise in the trend of total coliform in each month since 2009. Total coliform counts during 2009–14 were well below the 500 MPN/100 ml mark, while some months also showed counts near 800 MPN/100 ml. However, from 2016 onwards, the counts crossed a sustainable mark of 5000 MPN/100 ml for every month of each year. From 2009 to 2013, the total coliform counts fell mostly in Class B but exceeded all limits of Indian water quality standards to a great extent during 2016–19. The monthly mean was not even close to the maximum total coliform limit of 5000 MPN/100 ml, which made water quality in Class D and E categories. WHO standards nullify the presence of fecal coliform in water, whereas the Yamuna River was found to be in its alarming situation for this particular parameter.

Water discharge

The freshwater supply and inflow of wastewater in the river may affect the water quality. To uncover the influence, we analyzed the water discharge in the river Yamuna from 2013 to 2018 (the data is available for this period only). In Fig. 11 , we show the major locations of water abstraction and confluence in the Yamuna river starting from Yamunotri to Faridabad stretch. Hathnikund barrage was constructed to regulate the Yamuna water supply to Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and Delhi for agricultural and domestic purposes and it was also decided by the Government to maintain 10 cumes of water in the Yamuna downstream to maintain the aqua life in river. In Fig. 12 , we show the water discharge data of Hathnikund, Baghpat, and DRB. From 2013 to 2018, a significant fall in the water discharge is observed especially at Hathnikund, which allows the upstream water to reach Palla. The mean discharge in the river was found to be 123.7 cumes during the whole study period and the minimum was found much lower than 10 cumes (as suggested by the Government of India). Also, a significant fall is observed in recent years. The mean water discharge values at Baghpat are found to be 225 cumes and sometimes they reached far below than 5 cumes.

( Source : https://yamuna-revival.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Final-Report-of-YMC-29.06.2020.pdf ).

Points of water abstraction and additions in Yamuna river.

( a ) Temporal variation of water discharge at Hathnikund, Baghpat, and Delhi Railway Bridge (DRB) stations during Jan 2013 to May 2018. ( b ) The distribution of monthly mean water discharge during Jan 2013 to May 2018 at Baghpat. ( c ) Monthly mean variation of discharge from 2013 to 2018.

At DRB, the mean discharge value is found to be 107 cumes. During monsoon months, the water discharge at Baghpat is higher than that at the Hathnikund so that the watershed of the Yamuna also helps in the rise of the water discharge due to rainfall and also major drains confluence in the Yamuna. We can see that during August, the water discharge is the highest followed by July and September. During January, May, and December, the water discharge values reached far below the prescribed limit, and hence sometimes during these seasons, the Yamuna almost dried up and only the sewage and the industrial wastes water flow during these months (Fig. 12 c). After 2015, a significant fall in water discharge is observed during the summer and winter months. With the abstraction of fresh water at Hathnikund barrage and inflow of the drains, the water quality parameters are affected by a large extent in river Yamuna. Therefore, for further analysis of the impact of water discharge and rainfall, we also analyzed the relationship of monthly mean discharge, rainfall, DO saturation, BOD, and COD as shown by the polar plots (Figs. 13 , 14 ).

The relationship between the water discharge, Rainfall, BOD, and COD.

The monthly relationship between the water discharge, Rainfall and DO saturation.

Variability of DO, BOD, and COD

Water quality can be affected by various factors. Hence, we investigated the variability of the DO, BOD, and COD with water discharge and rainfall. In Fig. 13 , we plot the relationship of monthly mean water discharge at Baghpat, rainfall, BOD, and COD. The rainfall mostly affected the discharge values, but, sometimes, with low rainfall high discharge is observed. COD is mostly higher during the whole study period whereas BOD values have shown a fall in recent years. The impact of rainfall and high discharge is visible and low BOD and COD are observed. When the discharge is more than 525 cumes, the COD and BOD values are lower, and also more than 30 mm of rainfall is observed at that time. Further, we investigated the monthly relationship of the Discharge, rainfall, and DO saturation. Further analysis (Fig. 14 ) clearly shows that most rainfall occurred from June to September and caused a rise in the water discharge. During this time, the DO saturation values are more than 50%. The low DO saturation values are mostly observed during the time of low discharge and low rainfall (< 10%). We also found that during July to September with discharge between 200 to 400 cumes and rainfall more than 40 mm, the DO saturation remains lower than 10%. Further, Drain No. 6 having a catchment area of Samalkha Ganur and Sonipat, carries around 49 MLD of sewage in the year 2017 and rises to 210 MLD in the year 2018. Drain No. 8 crosses Drain No. 6 at Akbarpur, Sonipat, and meets river Yamuna just upstream of Palla village. There is a huge increase in the flow of Drain No. 8 between 2017 and 2018 from 196 to 2590 MLD. Drain No. 6 lined separately flow inside Drain No. 8 for 10 KM. Effluents from both drains mix with each other during the rainy season and due to accidental breach ( https://sandrp.in/2015/04/13/blow-by-blow-how-pollution-kills-the-yamuna-river-a-field-trip-report/ ). Similarly, sewage flow of Drain No. 2, which meets river Yamuna 100 km upstream of Delhi is increased from 62 to 2092 MLD between 2017 and 2018 by Central Pollution Control Board of India. As per Haryana State Pollution Control Board (HSPCB), the capacities of Sewage treatment plants (STP) for Drains No. 2, 6, and 8 were 72, 104.5, 125.3 MLD, respectively, till 2018. Also, the capacities of the common effluent treatment plant (CETP) for Drains No. 2, 6, and 8 were 21, 33.2, and 10 MLD, respectively. Since the total capacity for treating wastewater was far beyond sewage generation during 2017–18 and hence the untreated water mixed with the river water. This rise in wastewater generation from industrial and urban areas has caused a drastic decrease in DO saturation and an increase in Total Coliform. As per CPCB 2018 report ( https://yamuna-revival.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Final-Report-of-YMC-29.06.2020.pdf ), 7-day average discharge of the 10-year return period (7Q10) does not meet the habitat requirements of the indicator fish species. These conditions show the impact of rapid urbanization and industrialization along the river bank with high carbon concentration. With the recent development in industrial regions, change in land use/land cover and rapid urbanization in the Haryana, the watershed of Yamuna suffered a lot and hence the water quality of the river. One of the major causes of the sudden fall in the DO saturation in recent years is the fall in the freshwater discharge at the Hathnikund and also the fall in the rainfall in recent years. Also, the deteriorating water quality of Yamuna is a major concern for the Government and mostly this is affected in the stretch between Hathnikund and Palla due to rise in inflow of untreated drains water supply. In recent years, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) of India also requested the states Government to take necessary actions to combat present situation of river Yamuna by installation of more STEPs, ETPs and maintaining the treatment capacity of present treatment plants and channelizing the sewage network to reach treatment plants properly. However, due to lack of adequate fresh water supply and mixing of untreated sewage through regulated and unregulated drains, the quality of the Yamuna river lies in critical conditions.

Although National Capital Territory (NCT) is held responsible for most polluting river Yamuna, the study reveals that the quality of the river it receives is not admirable. The study of physiochemical and biological parameters shows variation in its monthly and yearly values during 2009–19. The effect of monsoon season can be easily seen on parameters like BOD, COD, total alkalinity, TDS and total coliform as their values declined, while DO saturation % showed a significant rise. DO saturation declined by more than 85% during this period. The BOD values improved during the last two years (2018–2019), but were still slightly higher than the permissible limit, while the COD value always remained quite higher than the permissible limits. In 2015, the worst condition was observed in terms of BOD and COD. Total alkalinity also remained low and below the prescribed standards, but TDS is the only parameter whose value was mostly in desired limits throughout the period. An exponential rise was observed in the total coliform count, which was 100–1000 times the maximum limit of IS:2296. Increasing discharge of partially treated industrial effluent and untreated sewage into the Yamuna in the past decade is considered to be the primary cause of the deterioration of water quality. Even after completion of YAP phases I and II, and ongoing phase III, the river still falls in the category of Class D or E under BIS specification, Class III or IV of UNECE standards, and does not fulfill the WHO guideline for water quality at Palla station.

Data availability

All the data used in the present study is freely available in the public domain and the web addresses are discussed in the manuscript, however, we will provide data to all the interested scientists.

Abbreviations

Bureau of Indian Standards

Biological oxygen demand

Common effluent treatment plants

Chemical oxygen demand

Central Pollution Control Board

Central Water Commission

Dissolved oxygen

Effluent treatment plant

Global Environmental Monitoring System

Haryana State Pollution Control Board

India Meteorological Department

Indian Space Research Organization

Kiloliters per day

Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2

Monitoring of Indian National Aquatic Resources

Millions of litres per day

Ministry of Environment and Forests

Most probable number

National Capital Region Planning Board

National Capital Territory

National Green Tribunal

National Water Quality Monitoring Programme

State Pollution Control Board

Total dissolved solid

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

World Health Organization

Water Resources and Information System

Yamuna Action Plan

CPCB 1980-81, The Ganga River Part I The Yamuna basin ADSORBS/22 . Central Pollution Control Board, Delhi, India (1981).

Jain, C. K. Metal fractionation study on bed sediments of River Yamuna, India. Water Res. 38 , 569–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2003.10.042 (2004).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Lokhande, S. & Tare, V. Spatio-temporal trends in the flow and water quality: Response of river Yamuna to urbanization. Environ. Monit. Assess. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-08873-x (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

CPCB (2006) Water Quality Status Of Yamuna River (1999 – 2005). Central Pollution Control Board, Ministry Of Environment & Forests, Assessment and Development of River Basin Series: ADSORBS/41/2006-07.

CPCB (2003) Annual Report 2002–2003,Water Quality Status of River Yamuna in Delhi.

Misra, A. K. A river about to die: Yamuna. J. Water Resour. Prot. 02 , 489–500. https://doi.org/10.4236/jwarp.2010.25056 (2010).

Article CAS Google Scholar

Sharma, D., Kansal, A. & Pelletier, G. Water quality modeling for urban reach of Yamuna river, India (1999–2009), using QUAL2Kw. Appl. Water Sci. 7 , 1535–1559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-015-0311-1 (2017).

Article ADS CAS Google Scholar

Manju, S. & Smita, C. Assessment of ground water quality in vicinity of industries and along Yamuna River in Yamuna Nagar, Haryana, India. Asian J. Sci. Technol. 4 , 54–61 (2013).

Google Scholar

Sharma, S. & Chhabra, M. S. Understanding the chemical metamorphosis of Yamuna River due to pollution load and human use. Int. Res. J. Environ. Sci. 4 , 2319–1414 (2015).

Kumar, B., Singh, U. K. & Ojha, S. N. Evaluation of geochemical data of Yamuna River using WQI and multivariate statistical analyses: A case study. Int. J. River Basin Manag. 17 , 143–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2018.1437743 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

Pachamuthu Muthaiyah, N. Rejuvenating Yamuna river by wastewater treatment and management. Int. J. Energy Environ. Sci. 5 , 14. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijees.20200501.13 (2020).

Parween, M., Ramanathan, A. & Raju, N. J. Waste water management and water quality of river Yamuna in the megacity of Delhi. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 14 (10), 2109–2124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-017-1280-8 (2017).

Arora, D. P. With most STPs out of order, Haryana continues to pollute the Yamuna [WWW Document]. Hindustan Times, Gurugram (2019). https://www.hindustantimes.com/gurugram/with-most-stps-out-of-order-haryana-continues-to-pollute-the-yamuna/story-4XTWZ9ErsWZrHvk17gWv0M.html . Accessed 16 Feb 2020.

CPCB 1982–1983 (1983) Assimilation capacity of point pollution load, CUPS/12

CPCB 1999–2000 (2000) Water quality status of Yamuna River, ADSORBS/32

Bhardwaj RM (2005) Water quality monitoring in India-achievements and constraints. IWG-Env International Work Session on Water Statistics 1–12

Sharma, A. Here We Go Again: Yamuna Action Plan Phase III [WWW Document]. Delhi Greens (2018). https://delhigreens.com/2018/12/29/here-we-go-again-yamuna-action-plan-phase-iii/ . Accessed 4 Oct 2020.

Anand, C., Akolkar, P. & Chakrabarti, R. Bacteriological water quality status of River Yamuna in Delhi. J. Environ. Biol. 27 , 97–101 (2006).

PubMed Google Scholar

Hassan, T., Parveen, S., Nabi, B. & Ahmad, U. Seasonal variations in water quality parameters of river Yamuna, India. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci 6 , 694–712. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.605.079 (2017).

Mutiyar, P. K., Gupta, S. K. & Mittal, A. K. Fate of pharmaceutical active compounds (PhACs) from River Yamuna, India: An ecotoxicological risk assessment approach. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 15 (150), 297–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.12.041 (2018).

Jaiswal, M., Hussain, J., Gupta, S. K., Nasr, M. & Nema, A. K. Comprehensive evaluation of water quality status for entire stretch of Yamuna River, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 191 , 208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-019-7312-8 (2019).

Kaur, L., Rishi, M. S. & Arora, N. K. Deciphering pollution vulnerability zones of River Yamuna in relation to existing land use land cover in Panipat, Haryana, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 193 , 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08832-y (2021).

Patel, P. P., Mondal, S. & Ghosh, K. G. Some respite for India’s dirtiest river? Examining the Yamuna’s water quality at Delhi during the COVID-19 lockdown period. Sci. Total Environ. 744 , 140851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140851 (2020).

Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Paliwal, R., Sharma, P. & Kansal, A. Water quality modelling of the river Yamuna (India) using QUAL2E-UNCAS. J. Environ. Manag. 83 , 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.02.003 (2007).

Krishan, G., Singh, S., Sharma, A., Sandhu, C., Grischek, T. et al. Assessment of river quality for river bank filtration along Yamuna River in Agra-Mathura districts of Uttar Pradesh. In Proceedings of National Conference on Monitoring and Management of Drinking Water Quality (MMDWQ) & XXVIII Annual Conference of National Environment Science Academy during 21–23 December, 2015 at UCOST, Dehradun (2015).

Kaur, H., Warren, A. & Kamra, K. Spatial variation in ciliate communities with respect to water quality in the Delhi NCR stretch of River Yamuna, India. Eur. J. Protistol. 79 , 125793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejop.2021.125793 (2021).

UNECE (1994) Standard Statistical Classification of Surface Freshwater Quality for the Maintenance of Aquatic Life. In Readings in International Environment Statistics . United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, United Nations, New York and Geneva.

HSPCB (2018) Action Plan for River Yamuna November 2018

Satyanarayana, P. & Sharma, J. R. Web Enabled Water Resources Information System for India . ARC India News (2009).

Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO). MERRA-2 tavg1_2d_slv_Nx: 2d,1-Hourly,Time-Averaged,Single-Level,Assimilation,Single-Level Diagnostics V5.12.4, Greenbelt, MD, USA, Goddard Earth Sciences Data and Information Services Center (GES DISC) [WWW Document] (2015). https://doi.org/10.5067/VJAFPLI1CSIV . Accessed 8 Oct 2020.

Gelaro, R. et al. The modern-era retrospective analysis for research and applications, version 2 (MERRA-2). J. Clim. 30 , 5419–5454. https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-16-0758.1 (2017).

Article ADS PubMed Google Scholar

Guhathakurta, P., Narkhede, N., Menon, P., Prasad, A. K. & Sangwan, N. (2020) Observed Rainfall Variability and Changes over Haryana State. Report on ESSO/IMD/HS/Rainfall Variability/09(2020)/33.

Servais, P., Seidl, M. & Mouchel, J. M. Comparison of parameters characterizing organic matter in a combined sewer during rainfall events and dry weather. Water Environ. Res 71 , 408–417. https://doi.org/10.2175/106143097X122112 (1999).

Khan, M. Y. A., Gani, K. M. & Chakrapani, G. J. Spatial and temporal variations of physicochemical and heavy metal pollution in Ramganga River—A tributary of River Ganges, India. Environ. Earth Sci. 76 , 231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-017-6547-3 (2017).

Kumar, V., Sharma, A., Thukral, A. K. & Bhardwaj, R. Water quality of River Beas, India. Curr. Sci. 112 , 1138–1157. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v112/i06/1138-1157 (2017).

Liu, J. et al. Spatial scale and seasonal dependence of land use impacts on riverine water quality in the Huai River basin, China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24 , 20995–21010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9733-7 (2017).

Singh, K. P., Malik, A., Mohan, D. & Sinha, S. Multivariate statistical techniques for the evaluation of spatial and temporal variations in water quality of Gomti River (India)—A case study. Water Res. 38 , 3980–3992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.06.011 (2004).

Prasad, B. S. R. V., Srinivasu, P. D. N., Varma, P. S., Raman, A. V. & Ray, S. Dynamics of dissolved oxygen in relation to saturation and health of an aquatic body: A case for Chilka Lagoon, India. J Ecosyst 2014 , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/526245 (2014).

Ravindra, K., Meenakshi, A., Rani, M. & Kaushik, A. Seasonal variations in physico-chemical characteristics of River Yamuna in Haryana and its ecological best-designated use. J. Environ. Monit. 5 , 419–426. https://doi.org/10.1039/b301723k (2003).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the National Water Informatics Centre (NWIC), a unit of the Ministry of Jal Shakti for providing updated data on water resources through a ‘Single Window’ source. We also thank research center O.I.E of Mines Paris Tech and ARMINES for providing meteorological data. The data used in the current study were freely available and their links are mentioned in their respective places. We express a great sense of gratitude towards the Central Pollution Control Board of India and other agencies for making data available.

This research was financially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) of Taiwan under the codes MOST 109-2923-E-008-004-MY2 and MOST 110-2111-M-008-008.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Civil Engineering, SRM IST, Delhi-NCR Campus, Ghaziabad, India

Pankaj Joshi

Centre for Space and Remote Sensing Research, National Central University, Taoyuan City, Taiwan

Akshansha Chauhan & Yuei-An Liou

Department of Engineering, University of Technology and Applied Sciences, Suhar, 311, Sultanate of Oman

Department of Chemistry, SRM IST, Delhi-NCR Campus, Ghaziabad, India

Sudheer Malik

National Museum Marine Science and Technology (NMMST), No. 367, Beining Rd., Zhongzheng Dist., Keelung City, 202010, Taiwan

Yuei-An Liou

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization—A.C. and Y.-A.L., Data analysis: P.J. and A.C., Methodology: P.J., S.M., Y.-A.L., Writing—original draft by P.J., A.C., S.M., P.D.; Review and editing—A.C., P.D., and Y.-A.L.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuei-An Liou .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Joshi, P., Chauhan, A., Dua, P. et al. Physicochemical and biological analysis of river Yamuna at Palla station from 2009 to 2019. Sci Rep 12 , 2870 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06900-6

Download citation

Received : 08 December 2021

Accepted : 07 February 2022

Published : 21 February 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-06900-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Water quality modeling-based assessment for the scope of wastewater treatment of the urban reach of river yamuna at delhi, india.

Nibedita Verma
Geeta Singh
Naved Ahsan

Environmental Monitoring and Assessment (2024)

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection

Cleaning the River Ganga: Impact of lockdown on water quality and future implications on river rejuvenation strategies

Associated data.

Clean rivers and healthy aquatic life symbolize that the ecosystem is functioning well. The Ganga River has shown signs of rejuvenation and a significant improvement on many parameters, following the eight-week nationwide lockdown due to coronavirus pandemic. Since industrial units and commercial establishments were closed, water was not being lifted by them with a negligible discharge of industrial wastewater. It was observed that during the lockdown period most of the districts falling under the Ganga basin observed 60% excess rainfall than the normal, which led to increased discharge in the river, further contributing towards the dilution of pollutants. Further, data analysis of live storages in the Ganga Basin revealed that the storage during the beginning of the third phase of lockdown was almost double than the storage during the same period the previous year. Analysis of the storage data of the last ten years revealed that the storage till May 6, 2020 was 82.83% more than the average of the previous ten years, which meant that more water was available for the river during the lockdown period. The impact could be seen in terms of increased dissolved oxygen (DO) and reduced biological oxygen demand (BOD), Faecal coliform, Total coliform and nitrate (NO 3 -) concentration. A declining trend in nitrate concentration was observed in most of the locations due to limited industrial activities and reduction in agricultural run-off due to harvesting season. The gradual transformation in the quality of the water has given a sign of optimism from the point of restoration. Yet, it is believed that this improvement in water quality is ‘short-lived’ and quality would deteriorate once the normal industrial activities are resumed, indicating a strong influence of untreated commercial–industrial wastewater. The paper concludes that the river can be rejuvenated if issues of wastewater and adequate flow releases are addressed.

Graphical abstract

1. Introduction

The Ganga alluvial plain is one of the most densely populated regions and the largest groundwater repositories on the earth ( Misra, 2011 ; Pal et al., 2020 ). About 43% of the population of India lives in the Ganga basin that stretches over 860,000 km 2 covering 26.3% of the country's total geographical area ( Trivedi, 2010 ; FAO, 2019 ). The basin extends over the states of Uttarakhand, Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and West Bengal.

In 2008, Ganga River was declared as the ‘National River’ of India. There are over 29 cities, 97 towns and thousands of villages along the banks of the Ganga River ( Bhutiani et al., 2016 ). The bio-geomorphological functions of River Ganga have been significantly modified by various large-scale anthropogenic factors such as fragmentation of river habitats, dams and barrages, discharge of industrial and domestic wastewater and intensive agriculture relying on chemical fertilizers, pesticides and insecticides ( Bhardwaj et al., 2010 ; Sinha et al., 2017 ). The major contributors to pollution are tanneries in Kanpur, distilleries, paper mills and sugar mills in the Yamuna, Kosi, Ramganga and Kali river catchments.

The nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) in India was announced on March 25 till April 14, 2020 (Lockdown 1.0). It was further extended by 19 days till May 3, 2020 (Lockdown 2.0). The lockdown was again extended until May 17, 2020 (Lockdown 3.0). While aerosol levels over the Indo-Gangetic Plains reported a 20-year-low during the lockdown as per the satellite data on optical depth measurements published by NASA due to restrictions imposed on industries, surface and air transport ( NASA, 2020 ); the impact on water quality in the Ganga River was arguable. Various news reports, as well as social media posts, indicated that ‘ life seemed to be returning to the river ’ ( India Today, 2020 ). It was reported that the lockdown had improved the health of River Ganga, which many projects of the government could not do during the past two decades. The water quality of Ganga River had witnessed visual improvement since enforcement of the nationwide lockdown started on March 24, 2020 that has led to a reduction in discharge of industrial effluents into it. The lockdown was extended for more than seven weeks, with its 1.3 billion people instructed to stay home in view of the coronavirus outbreak. With people staying indoors and industries shut during the lockdown period, it is crucial to assess if the water quality in the Ganga River has indeed seen a significant improvement. The paper analyses the impact of lockdown on water quality of Ganga River, and its major tributary Yamuna in Delhi, India. The paper also discusses issues and challenges to understand the magnitude of contamination and source relations and potential ways to improve the water quality. The paper finally provides important implications for future restoration strategies on Ganga River and approaches for designing appropriate control measures and action plans for river basin management.

2. About the study area

The Ganga River has been regarded as one of the holiest and sacred rivers of the world that witnesses high cultural and religious tourism on its banks, along with a heavy influx of tourists. The river has some of the most culturally significant stretches along with its courses, such as Rishikesh, Haridwar, and Allahabad where millions of people take holy dips during special days. The Bhagirathi river is the source stream of Ganga which originates from Gangotri glacier in the Himalaya in the Uttarkashi district of Uttarakhand State in India at an elevation of 3892 m (12,770 ft). Many small streams characterized by steep valleys and bedrock channels such as Alaknanda, Dhauliganga, Pindar, Mandakini and Bhilangana join together in the headwaters of Ganga. Alaknanda river joins Bhagirathi at Deoprayag, and the combined stream acquires the name of Ganga. It traverses 2525 km through a diverse climatic regime before flowing into the Bay of Bengal ( Fig. 1 ). The entire course of the Ganga River in India can be divided into three stretches ( Fig. 2 ): (i) upper stretch from the origin at Gomukh to Haridwar covering 294 km; (ii) middle stretch from Haridwar to Varanasi covering 1082 km, and (iii) lower stretch from Varanasi to its delta in Gangasagar covering 1134 km.

The course of Ganga River in India along with its major tributaries.

Three major segments of the Ganga Basin.

Major Himalayan tributaries of the Ganga are Yamuna, Ghagra, Gandak and Kosi which supply the majority of the water to the plains ( van der Vat et al., 2019 ). The river flow exhibits a marked seasonality with average monsoon season discharge 6 to 7 times higher than the average dry season discharge ( Singh and Pandey, 2019 ).

There has been a decline in fish catch along the river, suggesting a lack of supportive habitat and degradation of water quality. Destructive fishing, overfishing and the Farakka barrage were cited by fishers as the major causes of declines in fish catch from river–floodplain fisheries in Bihar ( Dey et al., 2020 ). Due to less discharge during the summer season, priority species like Gangetic dolphin and Gharial find difficulty in movement and are confined to few fragmented habitats. Lack of sufficient depth and flow of water during lean season become the most restraining factor as only 38.7% of the river stretch has a depth of 4 m or above ( WII, 2017 ).

3. Methodological approach

To have a better understanding of the transformation in the quality of water in Ganga, this paper analyses historical data on water quality and compares with quality observed during the lockdown period based upon the real-time water monitoring data of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and various state pollution control boards. Rainfall data obtained from Hydromet Division, India Meteorological Department New Delhi is analyzed to estimate the long-term departure from the normal in the Ganga Basin during the lockdown period and its possible contribution to the improvement of water quality. Basin storage data of the Central Water Commission (CWC) of the last ten years is analyzed and compared with the storage during the lockdown period. Minimum environmental -flow profile of river Ganga at Rishikesh is established following the flow norms prescribed by the Government of India and in view of water abstraction upstream. Summary of data points and significant parameters used in the study is provided in Table 1 .

Data points and major parameters used in the study.

Data points and period	Major parameter(s)	Data source	Purpose
Historical data of water quality of Ganga River (2017–2019)	DO, BOD, nitrate, ammoniacal nitrogen	Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), New Delhi; Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board; Delhi Pollution Control Committee	Long-term quality profile of various stretches
Water quality observed during the lockdown period (March–May 2020)	DO, BOD, nitrate, ammoniacal nitrogen, Faecal coliform, Total coliform	Real-Time Water Quality Monitoring Station (RTWQMS), CPCB, Uttar Pradesh Pollution Control Board	To develop a better understanding of the transformation in the quality of water in Ganga during the lockdown period
Rainfall in Ganga Basin (January to May 2020)	Daily rainfall	Hydromet Division, India Meteorological Department, New Delhi	To estimate the long-term departure from the normal rainfall in the Ganga Basin during the lockdown
Basin storage (2011–May 2020)	Weekly storages	Central Water Commission (CWC)	Data of the last ten years compared with the storage during the lockdown period

4. Flow obstructions and water abstractions

There are many dams and barrages on the main stem and tributaries of the Ganga River that have affected the natural flow regime and fragmented the habitat of aquatic wildlife, including the Gangetic dolphins, otters, wetland birds, freshwater turtles and fishes ( Fig. 3 ). Tehri dam has been built on the Bhagirathi river for hydropower generation and regulates water discharge during the lean seasons. The hydroelectric potential of the Ganga basin has been assessed as 20,711 MW. Out of the 142 identified schemes in the basin, projects with a total installed capacity of 4987 MW are in operation and projects with an installed capacity of about 1751 MW are in various stages of construction.

Dams, barrages and hydro-electric plants on Ganga upstream of Kanpur.

At Haridwar, Ganga opens to the Gangetic Plains, where a barrage (Bhimgowda barrage) diverts a large quantity of its waters into the Upper Ganga Canal (UGC), to provide water for irrigation. It is estimated that the discharge of UGC is about 297.5 cumec (m 3 /s), which runs through 272 miles of the main canal and about 4000 miles of distribution canal irrigating over 900,000 ha of agricultural land of Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh ( Acharya et al., 2016 ).

Further, about 76 km downstream of Haridwar, at Bijnore, another barrage diverts water into the Madhya Ganga Canal during monsoon months. At Narora, about 155 km downstream of Bijnor barrage, there is a further diversion of water into the Lower Ganga Canal. From the barrage at Kanpur, Ganga water is being diverted to meet the drinking water requirements.

About 492 major and medium irrigation projects divert a significant portion of water to the canals for irrigation. The majority of these projects are in Uttar Pradesh which has a canal network of about 74,000 km for irrigation ( Shah and Rajan, 2019 ). The data of diversion schemes and water abstractions reveal that about 30 diversions on the main stem of the Ganga River and tributaries divert 40 to 60% of the annual flow of Ganga for canal irrigation. This leaves a minimal volume of water to flow in the river during the remaining eight dry months. The flow has been severely affected in the recent past due to the over-abstraction of groundwater in the basin, which has a marked effect on water quality of the river. If the dry season diversions from the main stem of Ganga is stopped, the base flows as the river enters Bihar would be at least 25% higher ( Khan et al., 2014 ).

5. Environmental flow (e-flow) requirements and the prescribed flow standards

Due to increased abstraction from the river and flow impoundments, very less amount of water is left in the river channel, which adversely affects the natural self-purification process of the river. The stretch between Haridwar and Allahabad has the problem of low flows, especially from December to May. The river gets less water for the dilution of pollutants coming from domestic and industrial sources, which ultimately make the water unfit for a healthy ecosystem. The sedimentation in the riverbed also increases. Recognizing the minimum ecological needs of the river, Clause 3.3 of India's National Water Policy 2012 specifies that “a portion of river flows should be kept aside to meet ecological needs ensuring that the low and high releases are proportional to the natural flow regime, including base flow contribution in the low flow season through regulated groundwater uses” ( NWP, 2012 ).

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) issued an order that requires all the riparian states to maintain a minimum 15% to 20% of the average lean season flow in all the rivers of the country (O.A. No.498/2015-Pushp Saini versus Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change & Others dated 9.8.2017). However, the lean season flow is the lowest in the seasonal flow cycle of a river, and allocating only 15 to 20% will not be sufficient. The NGT has issued direction “ that as an interim measure , while diverting the water from Haridwar to the Ganga canal or even otherwise , the minimum e - flow in the main stem does not fall below 20 % of the average monthly lean season flow , which will be referred to the status of the river at Haridwar pre - diversion ” (NGT, order dated 13.7.2017 in the matter of O.A. 2000/2014-M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of Indian and Others).

Earlier, the expert appraisal committee for sanctioning of the river valley projects used to recommend 20% of average lean flow (average discharge of 4 leanest months) in 90% dependable year as environment flow in the river. The consortium of seven Indian Institute of Technology (IITs) recommended more than one-third of the average virgin flows of the river in the wet period and more than 40% of the dry period ( Consortium of 7 IITs, 2013 ). The Government of India (GoI) notified the minimum e-flows for Ganga River in October 2018 ( PIB, 2018 ) that are required to be maintained at various locations, which have been categorized into two parts – (i) e-flow for the upper stretch of the Ganga till Haridwar ( Table 2 ); and (ii) e-flow for the river from Haridwar to Unnao ( Table 3 ). Those projects which are not meeting the stipulated e-flows have to ensure the desired flow norms within three years.

Mandated e-flow notified for Upper Ganga River Basin starting from originating glaciers and through respective confluences finally meeting at Devprayag up to Haridwar.

Season	Months	(%) Percentage of monthly average flow observed during each of preceding 10-daily period
Dry	November to March	20
Lean	October, April and May	25
High flow	June to September	30 (i.e. 30% of monthly flow of high flow season)

Mandated e-flow notified for the main stem of Ganga River from Haridwar, Uttarakhand to Unnao, Uttar Pradesh.

Location of barrage	Minimum flow releases immediately downstream of barrages ( )
Location of barrage	Non-monsoon (October to May)	Monsoon (June to September)
Bhimgoda (Haridwar)	36	57
Bijnor	24	48
Narora	24	48
Kanpur	24	48

For example, required e-flows during November 11–20 ten daily periods shall be 20% of average inflows observed during ten daily periods between November 1–10. According to CWC (2020) , at least four hydropower projects failed to comply with minimum e-flow requirements in the upper stretch of the Ganga river basin.

However, it is not clear on what basis the e-flow norms were calculated, as the flow volumes are too small for adequate river functions. The notification does not consider flow requirements to proliferate the aquatic biodiversity of the river. The standards for e-flows are too low to ensure a healthy river system ( Fig. 4 ). These arbitrary and generic e-flow interpretations lack the spatio-temporal resolution required to maintain a healthy aquatic life in the river. In developing the standards, location of the hot-spots, requirements of aquatic species, and river-specific studies have not been taken into account. The current standards are so low that minimum depth requirements of priority species such as endangered Gangetic dolphins will not be met on the main stem of the Ganga. The e-flow norms on the remaining sections of the Ganga downstream of Kanpur and for other tributaries have still not been defined. The recommended e-flow norms are just 5 to 8% of the mean annual run-off (MAR) of the Ganga River, whereas, at least 30 to 50% of the annual flow is recommended for healthy river functions ( Dutta et al., 2020 ).

Minimum e-flow profile of river Ganga at Rishikesh as per the CWC (2020) status report, the low flow allocation is ‘residual’ and will not support a healthy ecosystem.

6. Major hot spots of water pollution

Many cities and towns located in the catchment of Ganga generate vast quantities of wastewater, a major portion of which ultimately reaches the river untreated or partially treated through the natural drainage system. In the upper hilly stretches up to Rishikesh, the water quality is good throughout the year except for sediments. It is from Rishikesh onwards, disposal of sewage into Ganga begins. Downstream of Haridwar, the water quality starts declining due to the discharge of domestic and industrial wastewater; nevertheless, the river is intensively used in its entire stretch for holy dips or bathing by a large number of people.

There are many polluting industries such as paper and pulp, sugar, fertilizers, textiles, automobiles and distilleries along the tributaries of Ganga such as Yamuna, Kali, Hindon and Ramganga rivers that contribute to the pollution load in the Ganga. The number of Grossly Polluting Industries (GPIs) in April 2019 were 1072 (Namami Gange, 2020 ). The main water quality issues are organic pollution indicated by BOD and pathogens indicated by coliform count, which are recorded much above the critical limit prescribed for ‘outdoor bathing’ as the designated best use. The water quality in terms of Faecal coliform (FC) count has been poor virtually all along the river downstream of Haridwar due to the discharge of domestic sewage. According to Trivedi (2010) , the amount of industrial wastewater by volume is about 20% of the total volume of wastewater generated in the Ganga Basin, out of which nearly 55% comes from Uttar Pradesh. An earlier study indicated that the worst affected stretch is 350 km long between Kannauj and Allahabad in Uttar Pradesh ( Trivedi, 2010 ). Sewage from Kanpur coupled with untreated toxic waste discharge from about 400 industrial units, many of them tanneries, results in severe deterioration of water quality.

About 3250 million liters per day (MLD) of sewage is generated by the 97 towns situated on the main stem of the Ganga River, approximately 20% of this comes from industrial and commercial sources. Against this, 2074 MLD is treated and the remaining 1176 MLD is discharged without any treatment. National Mission for Clean Ganga has sanctioned projects for creation of an additional 1240 MLD which will increase the capacity to 3314 MLD, and these projects are at various stages of implementation ( Fig. 5 ).

Status of existing sewage generation and treatment capacity in 97 towns along the main stem of the Ganga River.

Due to high BOD and FC in the river, along the major cities of Kanpur, Allahabad and Varanasi, the river is not fit for its designated best use of ‘outdoor bathing’. The river along the urban segments receives a large amount of treated and untreated wastewater. Sah et al. (2020) observed the presence of 13 banned and restricted organochlorine pesticides (OCPs) in the surface water along the Ganga River with lower stretch most contaminated posing highest ecological risk. Lindane (γ-HCH) was found to be the most dominant and frequently detected pesticide, indicating continued use of this pesticide in agricultural practices even after banning. In the urban stretch of Varanasi, the concentration of heavy metals in the river sediment was found highest for Fe followed by Mn, Zn, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Cd as compared to upstream and downstream stretches suggesting greater contamination in anthropogenic impacted river stretches ( Pandey and Singh, 2017 ).

7. Impact of lockdown on water quality

The notable level of improvement in water quality was due to the absence of industrial pollutants and reduction in the amount of solid waste that spanned for eight weeks. While the discharge of domestic sewerage has not reduced in this period, industrial effluent has nearly ended, which provided temporary improvements to the water quality. Amid the nationwide lockdown to contain the spread of the Covid-19 outbreak, the water quality of river Ganga at Haridwar was classified as ‘fit for drinking’ as per the report of Uttarakhand Pollution Control Board. The sections of media described it as an unprecedented success that the ambitious schemes of the government could not do for years, even after spending a significant amount of money. Due to the lockdown, water in Har-ki-Pauri, Haridwar ranked as Class A for the first time in the last two decades. The water had always been placed in Class B since the state of Uttarakhand was formed in the year 2000. Earlier, the river water was not found to be suitable for bathing at most of the monitoring centers along the river, except the upper stretch till Haridwar ( Kamboj and Kamboj, 2019 ). The quality of water between Rishikesh to Haridwar in Uttarakhand was fit for drinking with conventional treatment (Class A) as DO, BOD and TC level were within the prescribed water quality criteria. Improvement in the water quality was also observed between Haridwar and Kanpur which was fit outdoor bathing (Class B). A noticeable improvement was observed during the lockdown phase along the entire stretch of the river, specially upstream of Kanpur ( Fig. 6 ).

Improvement in the water quality in the Ganga River upstream of Kanpur, stretch up to Haridwar was fit for dirking after disinfection (Class A) whereas water downstream of Haridwar was fit for outdoor bathing (Class B).

Since most of the factories and commercial establishments were closed due to the lockdown, the Ganga River had become comparatively cleaner. However, the assessment of data shows that there was not much improvement in the organic load in the river as domestic discharges witnessed no change after lockdown.

The DO concentrations remained above 5 mg/L at all the locations which met the bathing criteria ( Fig. 7 ). The impact is attributed to the combined effect of reduced release of industrial wastewater and increased freshwater inflows due to excessive rainfall observed during the lockdown. Water-intensive agriculture was not practiced in the northern plains of the Ganga basin during the lockdown, as the period was harvesting season. Therefore, huge extraction of water for irrigation was avoided both from the canal network and the groundwater aquifers. The additional water could also be the source of dilution. This increasing value of DO may also be attributed to a reduction in wastes from various non-point sources. The suspended solids and turbidity in the river increased immediately after the lockdown due to heavy rains.

Trend in the observed DO (mg/L) values in the main stem of the Ganga River during 2019 (pre-lockdown) and 2020 (lockdown), showing increase in DO during the lockdown period.

There was no major reduction in BOD at most of the monitoring stations during the first three weeks, though lower BOD values were observed during fourth week as compared to previous weeks ( Fig. 8 ). A comparative assessment of BOD (mg/L) of Ganga River during the three months-period in 2019 (pre-lockdown average of March to May) and 2020 (lockdown average of March to May), shows decrease in BOD during the lockdown period, except for two stations ( Fig. 9 ).

Trend in the observed BOD (mg/L) values in the main stem of the Ganga River.

Comparative assessment of BOD (mg/L) of Ganga River during 2019 (pre-lockdown) and 2020 (lockdown), showing decrease in BOD during the lockdown period, except two stations.

There has been marginal reduction in COD values during the first four weeks of the lockdown period ( Fig. 10 ), which can be attributed to continued wastewater discharge from municipal sources and secondly, due to longer time requirements for COD reduction as compared to BOD.

Trend in the observed COD (mg/L) values in the main stem of the Ganga River.

A declining trend in nitrate concentration was observed in most of the locations due to limited industrial activities and reduction in agricultural run-off during the lockdown ( Fig. 11 ). Nitrate level on an average varied from 0.69 to 2 mg/L during the beginning of third phase of lockdown.

Trend in the observed values of Nitrate (NO 3 -) in the main stem of the Ganga River.

All the locations except Bijnore have shown increasing trends in the observed values of Ammoniacal nitrogen in both weeks of the lockdown ( Fig. 12 ). The reason could be the increased discharge of the untreated and partially treated wastewater from the municipal sewage and slower rate of dilution during the first phase of the lockdown. However, during the beginning of the third phase of the lockdown, all the locations showed Ammoniacal nitrogen less than the prescribed criteria of 1.2 mg/L limit.

Trend in the observed values of Ammoniacal nitrogen (NH 3 −N) in the main stem of the Ganga River.

There was also improvement in the bacteriological quality of the Ganga River during the lockdown period. Most of the stations recorded large reductions in the Total coliform and Faecal coliform counts ( Table 4 ).

Comparative assessment of Total coliform (MPN/100 mL) and Faecal coliform (MPN/100 mL) in the main stem of the Ganga River during 2019 (pre-lockdown) and 2020 (lockdown period), (mean ± SD).

	Total coliform (MPN/100 mL)		Faecal coliform (MPN/100 mL)
	Pre-lockdown (March to May 2019)	Lockdown period average (March to May 2020)	Pre-lockdown (March to May 2019)	Lockdown period average (March to May 2020)
Bijnore	NA	NA	NA	NA
Anupshahar (u/s)	540 ± 10	NA	233 ± 15	NA
Anupshahar (d/s)	423 ± 12	NA	220 ± 10	NA
Farrukabad	2333 ± 208	2333 ± 709	1400 ± 0	1087 ± 363
Kannauj (u/s)	4000 ± 100	3700 ± 346	2567 ± 115	1600 ± 173
Kannauj (d/s)	4700 ± 100	4500 ± 346	3033 ± 306	2367 ± 252
Bithur	3500 ± 265	4067 ± 252	2100 ± 100	1733 ± 58
Kanpur (u/s barrage)	3667 ± 416	4700 ± 346	2233 ± 252	2100 ± 100
Kanpur (u/s)	4167 ± 231	4333 ± 493	2667 ± 378	1900 ± 436
Kanpur (bridge 1)	8733 ± 577	23,467 ± 20,510	4800 ± 557	11,667 ± 12,419
Allahabad (Sirsa)	16,333 ± 1155	2567 ± 666	8033 ± 1168	1033 ± 584
Varanasi (Rajwari)	15,000 ± 1732	11,333 ± 3786	9000 ± 1732	5433 ± 2380
Murshidabad (Behrampore)	210,000 ± 134,907	6500 ± 5815	154,167 ± 91,892	3283 ± 3961
Murshidabad (Gorabazar)	198,333 ± 81,342	15,167 ± 17,821	141,667 ± 56,006	8167 ± 11,209
Murshidabad (Khagra)	210,833 ± 106,038	32,600 ± 69,316	85,892 ± 85,892	26,617 ± 57,185
Howrah bridge	73,417 ± 45,280	50,000 ± 20,000	38,752 ± 38,752	21,667 ± 4509

NA: data not available.

The improvement in the quality of water has also been observed in the most polluted stretch of Ganga's major tributary – Yamuna River in Delhi during April 2020 as compared to the previous year ( Fig. 13 ). Delhi covers only 0.2% of the Yamuna sub-basin in Ganga basin, but it impacts badly due to discharge of untreated municipal wastewater. BOD and COD values increased during the lockdown for first three sampling sites, the remaining sites showed decreasing trend. However, the values were still very high – rendering the water only suitable for propagation of wildlife and fisheries (Class D) and for irrigation and industrial cooling (Class E) ( Table 5 ).

BOD and COD values (mg/L) of River Yamuna in Delhi in April 2019 and 2020.

Average concentration of contaminants in the Yamuna river at different locations (January to April 2020) (mean ± SD).

S No.	Locations	pH	COD (mg/L)	BOD (mg/L)	DO (mg/L)	Faecal coliform (MPN/100 mL)
1	Palla	7.70 ± 0.26	32.5 ± 45.70	2.73 ± 0.22	7.83 ± 0.86	506
2	Surghat (downstream of Wazirabad barrage)	7.63 ± 0.42	11.5 ± 3.42	3.45 ± 0.53	5.03 ± 1.21	3567
3	Khajori Palton pool (downstream of Najafgarh drain)	6.99 ± 0.94	103 ± 17.70	31.25 ± 2.75	Nil	44× 10
4	Kudesia ghat	7.37 ± 0.26	80 ± 14.24	28.25 ± 2.87	Nil	36× 10
5	ITO bridge	7.61 ± 0.25	69 ± 26.81	26.75 ± 4.27	2.3	46× 10
6	Nizamudin bridge	7.64 ± 0.19	68.5 ± 17.77	25 ± 6.83	1.73 ± 0.64	94× 10
7	Agra canal (Okhla)	7.72 ± 0.09	103.5 ± 42.53	31.5 ± 11.47	4.8	25× 10
8	After meeting Shahdara drain (downstream Okhla barrage)	7.91 ± 0.19	141 ± 45.88	51 ± 18.96	Nil	47× 10
9	Agra canal (Jaitpur)	7.64 ± 0.19	76 ± 20.91	26 ± 7.35	4.2	70× 10

Note: Nil means DO value is zero in all four months; data obtained from Delhi Pollution Control Committee, Delhi.

According to the data from real-time water monitoring of the CPCB, the water quality at 27 monitoring stations was suitable for bathing (Class B) and 9 stations suitable for propagation of wildlife and fisheries (Class C), out of the 36 monitoring stations placed on the main channel of the Ganga River. Earlier, except upper stretches in Uttarakhand and a couple of places in Uttar Pradesh, the water quality was found to be unfit for bathing for the remaining stretch till it merged into the Bay of Bengal. It is important to mention here that such speedy improvement spanning almost the entire stretch had not been witnessed in the past three to four decades. The data from various monitoring stations clearly show an increasing trend in DO values of the river at most of the locations during the second and third week since lockdown started ( Table 6 ).

Trends in observed quality of water during lockdown on the main stream of the River Ganga based on real time water quality data.

Parameter	Pre-lockdown	During lockdown	Overall trend in water quality
Dissolve oxygen (DO)	Pre-lockdown DO at most of the stations were above 7 mg/L	A slight decrease in DO at all places, due to an increase in turbidity and suspended solids coming from heavy rain spells is observed during the first phase of the lockdown. Bijnaur in UP recorded a 40% decrease in DO. DO showed slight improvement during the second phase. On average, there is an increase in DO by 3 to 20% at various locations. During the third phase of the lockdown, DO increased in UP and West Bengal, except at Belgharia. DO at all the locations was more than 5 mg/L. Narora reported maximum DO of 9.71 mg/L. At Varanasi, DO increased to 6.8 mg/L against 3.6 mg/L pre-lockdown, showcasing major improvement.	DO for all the locations above outdoor bathing criteria. Increased trend of DO in week 2 and 3 of the lockdown due to reduced released of the industrial waste and discharge from non-point sources. The flow due to snow melt contribution and rainfall increased and the parameters of river water quality have shown signs of improvement.
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD)	Pre-lockdown range of the BOD between 1.37 mg/L to 5.58 mg/L BOD level of Madhya Ganga Barrage Anupshahar, Narora Barrage, Ghatiyaghat Bridge has remained below 3 mg/L	BOD level of Madhya Ganga Barrage Anupshahar, Narora Barrage, Ghatiya ghat Bridge remained below 3 mg/L during the first phase of the lockdown. Fatehpur showed higher BOD values due to the discharge of wastewater through the polluted Pandu river. BOD has shown an increasing trend at Kanpur, a gradual increase in BOD also noticed in the downstream stretch with maximum being in West Bengal during the first phase of the lockdown. Increase in BOD at Kannauj, Kanpur, Fatehpur and Behrampore indicated continual discharge of the wastewater. BOD averaged between 1.8 and 2.5 mg/L prior to the lockdown at Patna, which further decreased to 1.6 to 2.0 mg/L during the second phase of the lockdown. BOD at most of the locations remained below 3 mg/L. BOD in West Bengal stretch varied from 3 to 5 mg/L, slightly higher than preceding week. Minimum BOD of 0.20 mg/L was reported at Murshidabad. Downstream of Srirampore and Howrah bridge reported a declining BOD trend of 1.04 and 0.59 mg/L, respectively.	Steep reduction in BOD at most of the locations during 7th week of lockdown. Water quality good for outdoor bathing; in some stretches upstream of Haridwar, the water became fit for drinking after conventional treatment.
Chemical oxygen demand (COD)	COD varied between 6.14 and 17.7 mg/L during pre-lockdown period	Kannauj and Fatehpur in UP recorded the highest COD in first two weeks of lockdown. Highest COD was recorded in Kanpur, Fatehpur and Behrampur West Bengal. Kannauj, Shuklaganj Bridge, Bridge at Ansi in UP and Bridge at Behrampore in West Bengal recorded high COD values indicating longer time requirements for COD reduction as compared to BOD. All locations reported COD of 9 mg/L or less. Downstream of Srirampore in West Bengal reported COD of 1.59 mg/L and Murshidabad d/s reported COD of 0.90 mg/L	Reduction was observed during lockdown periods for most of the stations except Bithur, Kanpur and Fatehpur in UP and Behrampore in West Bengal. The range of COD after six weeks of lockdown ranged from 0.9 mg/L to 9 mg/L.
Nitrate (NO -)	Highest nitrate values were recorded in Madhya Ganga Barrage, UP	Marginal changes were observed in first week in comparison to the pre-lockdown condition. Bijnaur, Narora, Kanpur record decrease in nitrate concentration in the second week of the lockdown. Most stations recorded a decrease in nitrate concentration except Fatehpur, Allahabad in UP and Behrampore, and Srirampore in WB. Kachla Bridge in UP reported a maximum nitrate level of 9 mg/L with Narora reporting nitrate level of 0.69 mg/L. During the third phase of the lockdown, maximum stations reported nitrate level less than 2.40 mg/L.	Due to limited industrial and agricultural run-off, a decline trend in nitrate concentration was observed. The nitrate level on an average varied from 0.69 to 2 mg/L.
Ammoniacal nitrogen (NH -N)	Anupshahar, Pariyal Bridge, Kanpur in UP and Belgharia in West Bengal record highest ammoniacal nitrogen	An increasing trend in comparison to pre-lockdown for most of the locations is observed during the first phase of the lockdown. The increasing trend observed in the second phase also, with the highest value recorded at Anupshahar in UP and at Belgharia in West Bengal. Narora, Kachla Bridge, Kannauj, Madhya Ganga Barrage, in UP and Murshidabad, d/s of Srirampore and Howrah Bridge in West Bengal reported 1.1 mg/L of Ammoniacal nitrogen less than the prescribed criteria of 1.2 mg/L limit during the thithird phase of the lockdown.	Ammoniacal nitrogen has shown increased levels from 0.15 to 2 mg/L during the first two phases of the lockdown. During the beginning of the third phase of the lockdown, all the locations showed ammoniacal nitrogen less than the prescribed criteria of 1.2 mg/L limit. The main reason being the increased discharge of the untreated and partially treated wastewater.

8. Reasons for the improvement of water quality in Ganga during the lockdown period

8.1. higher rainfall events.

The period also coincided with a high number of western disturbances, which brought excess rainfall in the basin, improving the flow in the river leading to dilution of the pollutants. Analysis of rainfall data obtained from Hydromet Division, India Meteorological Department New Delhi indicated that from March 1 to May 6, 2020 most of the districts falling under the Ganga basin observed 60% excess rainfall than the normal, which led to increased discharge in the river, further contributing towards the dilution of pollutants ( Fig. 14 ).

Rainfall in the Ganga Basin showing large excess (60% above the normal) which contributed to higher storage and discharge.

8.2. Increase in the surface storages in the basin

Snowmelt after April contributes a significant amount of water to the river. The last two winters of 2018–19 and 2019–20 have seen plentiful snowfall in Uttarakhand, in 2019 the state received six times more snowfall than it did in 2018. During the start of 2020, the state recorded almost 17 in. of snowfall ( Singh, 2020 ). During the last two winter seasons, significant snowfall events improved the snow cover on the glaciers. It was after 15 years that regions at an altitude of 2000 m witnessed snowfall. This increase in snowfall had a beneficial impact on reservoir storage and flow in the river. Storage on 6th May 2020 was 49.27%, which was almost double than the storage during the previous year (25.89%). Analyzing the data of the last ten years, the storage till May 6th, 2020 was 82.83% more than the average of previous 10 years ( Table 7 ).

Storage in the Ganga River Basin based on weekly storages and percentage departure with respect to last year and previous 10 years (data period 2 January, 2020 to 6 May, 2020).

Date	Live capacity at FRL	This year storage (2020)		Last year storage (2019)		Last 10 year average storage		Percentage departure w.r.t. average of 10 years
02.01.2020	30.184	22.657	75.06%	14.769	48.93%	15.575	51.60%	45.47
09.01.2020	30.184	22.067	73.11%	14.210	47.08%	15.494	51.33%	42.42
16.01.2020	30.184	21.524	71.31%	13.517	44.78%	14.535	48.15%	48.08
23.01.2020	30.184	21.042	69.71%	12.996	43.06%	14.775	48.95%	42.42
30.01.2020	30.184	20.713	68.62%	13.145	43.55%	14.441	47.84%	43.43
06.02.2020	30.184	19.888	65.89%	12.040	39.89%	13.324	44.14%	49.26
13.02.2020	30.184	19.150	63.44%	11.565	38.32%	12.708	42.10%	50.69
20.02.2020	30.184	18.518	61.35%	11.355	37.62%	12.530	41.51%	47.79
27.02.2020	30.184	17.699	58.64%	10.699	35.45%	12.260	40.62%	44.36
05.03.2020	30.184	17.125	56.74%	10.309	34.15%	11.678	38.69%	46.64
12.03.2020	30.184	16.616	55.05%	10.181	33.73%	11.330	37.54%	46.65
26.03.2020	30.184	16.084	53.29%	9.685	32.09%	10.899	36.11%	47.57
09.04.2020	30.184	15.199	50.35%	8.176	27.09%	9.761	32.34%	55.71
16.04.2020	30.184	14.933	49.47%	7.890	26.14%	9.507	31.50%	57.07
23.04.2020	30.184	14.871	49.27%	7.601	25.18%	9.153	30.32%	62.47
30.04.2020	30.184	14.654	48.55%	7.536	24.97%	9.020	29.88%	62.46
06.05.2020	30.184	14.534	48.15%	7.503	24.89%	7.950	26.34%	82.83

8.3. Increase in baseflow due to harvesting season

In the Ganga Basin, the eight weeks of lockdown period coincided with the harvesting season; therefore, the agriculture sector was also not withdrawing much water. As the abstraction of groundwater in the Ganga Basin is very high, it affects the baseflow in the river ( Maheswaran et al., 2016 ). Due to unabated long term groundwater extraction, a sharp decrease in critical dry weather baseflow contributions has been observed ( MacDonald et al., 2016 ; de Graaf et al., 2019 ). The surge in groundwater extraction coincides with the demand for dry season irrigation for intensive agriculture. The baseflows are diverted for meeting the demand from irrigation ( Jain, 2015 ). It has been observed that when groundwater levels decline, discharges from groundwater to streams also decline ( Sharma and Dutta, 2020 ), which decreases streamflow, with potentially distressing effects on the health of the aquatic ecosystems. Apart from groundwater, over 40% of the annual flow of Ganga till Kanpur is diverted for canal irrigation. Since there was no sowing of crops or irrigation requirements, the amount of diversion also declined.

8.4. Reduction in the discharge of wastewater from industrial and commercial units

Almost zero industrial pollution due to complete lockdown increased the quality of water in the Ganga River. The water quality improved significantly at Kanpur, Varanasi and Allahabad since the enforcement of the lockdown, especially around the industrial clusters. This indicates that industrial effluents were not being adequately treated before being discharged into the river. The wastewater discharged into the Ganga basin ranged between 6500 and 6700 MLD in its middle and downstream stretch, of which around 20% was toxic load from industries. Therefore, there was a reduction of about 1300 to 1340 MLD of industrial wastewater during the lockdown period. When sewage is mixed with industrial effluents, it negatively affects the self-cleaning abilities of the stream. The organic pollution level from domestic sewage gets diluted in the river comparatively at a faster rate than the inorganic pollution ( Bhaskar et al., 2020 ). Still, it is the chemical pollution by industries (high COD) that destroys the river's self-cleaning properties in a big way due to complex nature of pollutants. The self-cleaning properties had improved due to which the water quality also improved.

8.5. Decrease in electricity demand

The daily requirement for electricity dipped by a minimum 15% across the globe based upon data from 30 countries on account of the shutting of industrial and commercial operations during lockdown ( IEA, 2020 ). In India, according to the Power System Operation Corporation, electricity production fell by 32.2% to 1.91 billion units (kilowatt-hours) per day, compared to the 2019 levels ( DTE, 2020 ). As per the statistics of all India installed capacity of power stations during and of March 2020, hydropower constituted about 23.01% of the total power production ( CEA, 2020 ). There are 39 hydro-electric projects in the Ganga basin in India, out of which 27 are major, and 12 are small hydro-electric projects. Due to a reduction in electricity demand, hydropower production may have dipped, allowing more water releases to the river. The water in Yamuna increased to 3900 cusec in April 2020 as compared to 1000 cusec in April 2019. This has allowed significant dilution to the pollutants coming from various drains.

8.6. Complete restriction on other activities such as tourism, fairs, bathing and cloth washing

As the public were not allowed to congregate for religious activities and fair, it reduced the local impacts of solid waste coming to the river. The activities near the ghats (river banks) were curtailed. River during lockdown was free from the problems of solid waste dumping and littering along its banks by visitors. The visual perception and aesthetics of river banks and accessible ghats along major cities improved due to the public not accessing the river for rituals and bathing.

9. Impact of infrastructure put up by national schemes and action plans

Significant improvement has been seen around Ganga in Kanpur, an industrial town, from where a large volume of industrial waste is generated and discharged into the rivers. In Kanpur, the Sisamau drain which used to discharge about 183.29 MLD of untreated water into the river was stopped in 2019 under the Namami Gange project ( Fig. 15 ). This has brought down the water pollution considerably during the lockdown pweriod. About 16 large drains used to discharge untreated wastewater in Kanpur, out of which 8 drains have been tapped and diverted to sewage treatment plant (STP) till December 2019.

Sisamau drain – the biggest source of untreated municipal wastewater (183.29 MLD discharge rate) in the Ganga River in the heavily polluted urban segment of Kanpur City, A: before lockdown (2019) B: during lockdown (2020).

A total of 254 projects worth Rs. 246,720 million have been sanctioned under Namami Gange programme for sewage infrastructure, river banks and crematoria development, riverfront development, river surface cleaning, biodiversity conservation, afforestation, rural sanitation, and public participation ( PIB, 2018a ). There are about 63 sewerage management projects which are under implementation, while 12 new sewerage projects were completed before the lockdown started. About 30 new STPs in Uttarakhand have been installed. Three STPs of total treatment capacity of 38.5 MLD started functioning at Rishikesh upstream of Haridwar from March 2020. A 14 MLD STP was also completed at Haridwar in July 2019. Till April 2019, 1930 MLD of sewerage treatment capacity in 97 towns has been developed, whereas the sewerage generation in these towns is 2953 MLD ( Dutta, 2020 ). In view of the current treatment capacity and wastewater generation, the gap in treatment capacity in the riparian states is very large which amounts to 6321 MLD ( Fig. 16 ). The various sanctioned projects would create additional 2205 MLD sewage treatment capacity and 4762 km of sewerage network in addition to rehabilitating older STPs of 564 MLD capacity.

Sewage generation, treatment capacity and shortfall in sewage treatment in the major riparian states of the Ganga Basin.

There have been several ambitious projects to clean the Ganga river, from Ganga Action Plan (GAP) – Phase I, and II to the Namami Gange project ( Table 8 ). The previous projects have yielded sub-optimal results, mainly due to (a) insufficient capacity of STPs as effluents from municipalities and industries flew untreated into the river, contaminating it and making the water unfit; (b) the amount of wastewater from non-point sources such as agricultural run-off is challenging to check. It is also due to the fact that, efforts of expanding sewage treatment infrastructure to achieve the target of cleaner Ganga were not adequate in comparison to the fast rate of urbanization. Water scarcity resulting from over-abstraction of surface and groundwater in the basin due to the rapid increase in water demand also exacerbates the problem.

River rejuvenation schemes to clean River Ganga and their shortcoming.

River rejuvenation schemes	Period	Total investment	Major shortcomings
Ganga Action Plan (GAP) Phase I	1985–2000	Rs. 462.04 Cr. (360.96 million USD)	The focus was restricted to augmentation of wastewater treatment facilities only Technologies adopted for sewage treatment did not meet of suitability and efficiency criteria Lack of efforts on water resources management, conservation or its judicious use Lack of mass awareness, public participation, and involvement of various stakeholders
Ganga Action Plan (GAP) Phase II (It also covered Yamuna, Gomti and Damodar rivers)	1993–1999	Rs. 2285.48 Cr. (749.58 million USD)	Lack of sufficient budgetary allocations and resources for operation and maintenance of the wastewater treatment facilities created Primary focus on the engineering-centric approach no focus on ecological entities of the river lack of cooperation between central and state governments and municipal authorities
National Ganga River Basin Authority (NGRBA)	20th February 2009–20th September 2016	Rs. 4607.82 Cr. (951.82 million USD)	Ecological flows in the Ganga and its tributaries was not integrated in the basin management plan Basin-wide environment management plan ignored the role of large and small tributaries lack of long term involvement of municipal and planning authorities
National Mission for Clean Ganga (NMCG)	12th August 2011–7th October 2016	Rs. 4607.82 Cr. (951.82 million USD)	Lack of enabling policy and legal framework Lack of coordination between various riparian states
Programme	Continuing since June 2014	Rs. 20,000 Cr. (3208.72 million USD)	Diminutive focus on ecological and geological integrity of the river Smaller tributaries of Ganga have not been included so far Environmental flow allocations are low sub-optimal control of industrial pollution

GAP was launched by Government of India in 1985 to assist the urban local bodies to install sewage treatment plants in the 27 priority towns along the Ganga River to restore its water quality. Under GAP, 1098.31 MLD sewage treatment capacities were created. In Phase-I of the GAP, a total treatment capacity of 870 MLD was created (Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, 2009, http://www.envfor.nic.in/nrcd ). Subsequently, during Phase-II of the GAP, an additional capacity of 130 MLD was created in 48 smaller towns along the river. Similarly, a treatment capacity of 720 MLD was created under the Yamuna Action Plan, (YAP) and a capacity of 2330 MLD was created by Government of Delhi for the restoration of water quality in the Yamuna River. About 84 STPs having a combined treatment capacity of 1579 MLD were constructed under GAP – I and II, NGRBA, and state projects along the main stem of river Ganga. Various studies reported that many of these STPs are (a) underutilized as per design standards ; (b) non - functional and (c) do not meet the quality standards suggested by the regulatory bodies . Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) initiated a project called Pollution Inventorization Assessment and Surveillance (PIAS) to assess the functioning and treatment efficiencies of 67 STPs located on the main stem of Ganga River. These STPs were having a total treatment capacity of 1209 MLD. As per their findings, only 32 STPs with a capacity of 675.7 MLD were observed to be functional.

Due to the paucity of sufficient financial resources to run the treatment plants created under GAP or YAP, and due to technical and operational disruptions, there has been no marked impact on improvement in water quality of the rivers ( Trivedi, 2010 ). India's National Green Tribunal (NGT) in its judgment order (O.A. No. 200/2014 in the matter of M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India for Segment B, Phase I dated 13th July 2017) observed that “ even after spending Rs . 7304.64 crore up to March 2017 , by the Central , State Government and local authorities of the State of UP , the status of river Ganga has not improved in terms of quality or otherwise and it continues to be a serious environmental issue ” ( Bhagirath, 2017 ).

After GAP Phase I and II, the GoI intensified its efforts for pollution abatement of river Ganga through various projects, mainly targeting at the treatment of municipal sewage, industrial effluents, river surface cleaning, rural sanitation, afforestation and biodiversity conservation. Realizing the shortcoming of GAP I and II, NMCG sanctioned projects for up-gradation and rehabilitation of 23 existing STPs. These projects are centered around cities located on the banks of the Ganga and heavily depend upon the construction of sewerage networks, interception and diversion projects and development of STPs.

10. Key lessons from the lockdown and future perspectives

The population in the Ganga basin will increase in the future with an increase in industries and urban settlements. This is expected to generate a huge demand for additional water. As the water in the main channel and its various tributaries are limited, the substantial increase in demand would further deteriorate the water quality. It is worthwhile to examine key lessons that the pandemic signaled for river management – most importantly, river can be rejuvenated if issues of industrial effluents and adequate flow releases are addressed. The six major recommendations from the lockdown period are outlined below as crucial lessons for developing future perspectives on river rejuvenation.

10.1. Requirement of more stringent regulatory controls

Strict quality regulation and enforcement are required to check the incompliance related to wastewater treatment and discharge. The state pollution control boards are not equipped to handle this and a new system may be devised. There is a need for third-party compliance verification against stipulated environmental norms for existing STPs and industries to bring in more efficiency and transparency.

10.2. Reducing the burden of water abstraction

It is clear from the flow profile that lean season flows in the basin will not be sufficient to meet the human demands and, at the same time, fulfill the ecological requirements. Even though the UGC and LGC are relatively large irrigation systems, irrigation in the Ganga basin today depends on tubewells far more than canals ( Shah and Rajan, 2019 ). A multipronged strategy is required to optimally manage the old canal network and storages in order to maximize water use efficiency and irrigation benefits. This would improve the dry season river flows.

10.3. Increasing the speed of project implementation

It has been observed that there is a slow implementation of projects sanctioned by NMCG, with many projects still in the conceptual and planning stage ( CAG, 2017 ). Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms of ongoing and completed projects have been far from adequate.

10.4. Redefining the standards for industries in view of the impact on water quality

The river entering a watershed boundary should leave with at least the same quality of water as it entered with. The wastewater must be treated up to freshwater levels before putting it back into the river. The volume-wise contribution of industrial pollution in Ganga is about 20%, but due to toxicity and high inorganic impurities, this has much more significant damage on the aquatic ecosystem. The industries are allowed based on meeting the required standards and compliances, but the level of pollution is high. In view of this, it is desirable to revisit the prescribed standards and make suitable amendments.

10.5. Moving to ecological flow regimes from the current conservative e-flow estimates

The current e-flow norms are treated as residual, which is insufficient to meet the requirements of the aquatic ecosystem. Several water abstraction, diversion, and storage projects have been designed on the Ganga River without looking at the needs of supporting its own ecosystem. Excessive water abstraction coupled with pollution ingress not only hampers aquatic life but also diminishes river's self-purification and dilution prospects. It appears that e-flow norms have been developed as a reference to water only; the other critical aspects such as sediment transport, biota and nutrients have been ignored. The holistic flow regime of adequate magnitude, timing, frequency and duration are required to sustain aquatic ecosystems. This would also sustainably ensure other supporting services by the river, such as sedimentation, flooding, river landscape and connected water bodies.

10.6. Designing different strategies for hot-spots and grossly polluting industries (GPIs)

The primary cause of water pollution in Kanpur and the catchment of Yamuna river is the discharge of untreated and partially treated toxic industrial waste mainly from tanneries, paper and pulp industries, electroplating and distilleries which is discharged into the river. As of April 2019, the number of GPI stood at 1072 (Namami Gange, 2020 ). Therefore, stringent actions are required for checking the pollution form these hot-spots and GPIs.

11. Conclusion

During the lockdown, all major polluting industries were closed; the toxic load was off the river. The improvement in water quality has been seen especially around the industrial clusters and urban areas, which used to witness huge pollution load due to the discharge of untreated and partially treated wastewater. The contributing factor of municipal sewage generation and treatment capacities remained the same since commissioned STPs were running as they used to run before the lockdown period. The lockdown period also witnessed large rainfall events resulting in more flow in the river with better prospects of dilution of pollutants. The way the quality of water has improved in the river during the lockdown, it is evident that the problem of water quality deterioration is largely anthropogenic – (i) stemming from discharge of untreated or partially treated effluents from industries, commercial establishments and municipalities; and (ii) reduced dilution prospects due to over-allocation to canals. The findings also reflected that domestic sewerage was not the only cause of concern; adequate flow is crucial for dilution of the pollutants. During the lockdown, industrial activities were stopped and the production of essential items was allowed after four weeks since lockdown began. There was definitely less effluent generation and discharge. However, it also indicated poor implementation of environmental regulation from various central and state regulatory bodies. In the past several elaborate plans with the allocation of budgets were made to clean the river. But there was no apparent improvement in the health of the river. The improvement in water quality is a temporary reprieve as major schemes to regulate the grossly polluting industries in the river's catchments are still awaited. There should be a rethink on the whole issue of river rejuvenation efforts—establishing the role of industrial discharges and the need for compliances of discharge standards. Various ambitious rejuvenation projects by multiple governments could not bring the desired results in such a short period. Keeping in mind the increasing rate of urbanization and pollution loading in the river, necessary measures should be taken to reduce future deterioration of water quality in the river. The challenge would be to keep the river in similar conditions post-lockdown, which can be possible with two times increases in the existing treatment capacity, stringent industrial pollution control measures and behavioral change to supplement infrastructure creation.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Venkatesh Dutta: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft. Divya Dubey: Data curation, Methodology. Saroj Kumar: Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Appendix A Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140756 .

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Variation in flow and organic load of priority drains during pre and post-monsoon in 2018 discharged into the Ganga River

Priority drains monitored during pre-monsoon, in 2018 discharged into the River Ganga

District-wise weekly departure in rainfall (cumulative) during March 1 to May 6, 2020

Storage in the Ganga River Basin based on weekly storages

Designated best uses of water quality criteria and Hydro projects under operation in the Upper Ganga Basin

Comparative assessment of water quality of Ganga River during 2019 (pre-lockdown) and 2020 (lockdown)

Water quality of Yamuna River in 2020 at nine locations

Acharya S., Pandey A., Mishra S.K., Chaube U.C. GIS based graphical user interface for irrigation management. Water Sci. and Technol.: Water Supply. 2016; 16 :1536–1551. [ Google Scholar ]
Bhagirath . vol.- LXIV (4) Central Water Commission; New Delhi: 2017. Water Resources in Parliament, Indian Water Resources Quarterly, October – December 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
Bhardwaj V., Singh D.S., Singh A.K. Water quality of the Chhoti Gandak River using principal component analysis, Ganga Plain, India. J. Earth Syst. Sci. 2010; 119 :117–127. [ Google Scholar ]
Bhaskar M., Dixit A.K., Ojha K.K., Dubey S., Singh A., Abhishek A. The impact of anthropogenic organic and inorganic pollutants on the Hasdeo River Water Quality in Korba Region, Chhattisgarh, India. Bioinformation. 2020; 16 (4):332–340. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bhutiani R., Khanna D.R., Kulkarni D.B., Ruhela M. Assessment of Ganga river ecosystem at Haridwar, Uttarakhand, India with reference to water quality indices. Appl Water Sci. 2016; 6 :107–113. [ Google Scholar ]
CAG . 2017. Rejuvenation of River Ganga (Namami Gange): Chapter 9, Monitoring and Evaluation, Comptroller and Auditor General of India. [ Google Scholar ]
CEA All India Installed Capacity (in MW) of Power Stations. 2020. http://www.cea.nic.in/reports/monthly/installedcapacity/2020/installed_capacity-03.pdf available at.
Consortium of 7 IITs . Indian Institute of Technology; Kanpur: 2013. Ganga River Basin Management Plan Interim Report, Report of the Consortium of 7 IITs. [ Google Scholar ]
CWC . Upper Ganga Basin Organization, Central Water Commission; Government of India: 2020. Implementation of Minimum Environmental Flows in River Ganga, Status Report. [ Google Scholar ]
de Graaf I.E., Gleeson T., van Beek L.R., Sutanudjaja E.H., Bierkens M.F. Environmental flow limits to global groundwater pumping. Nature. 2019; 574 :90–94. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Dey S., Choudhary S.K., Dey S., Deshpande K., Kelkar N. Identifying potential causes of fish declines through local ecological knowledge of fishers in the Ganga River, eastern Bihar, India. Fisheries Manage. and Ecol. 2020; 27 :140–154. [ Google Scholar ]
DTE COVID-19: daily electricity demand dips 15% globally, says report. 2020. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/news/energy/covid-19-daily-electricity-demand-dips-15-globally-says-report-70904 available at.
Dutta V. Down to Earth, Centre for Science and Environment; 2020. 10 critical steps for Ganga revival. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/water/10-critical-steps-for-ganga-revival-68482 available at.
Dutta V., Sharma U., Kumar R. Environmental Concerns and Sustainable Development 2020. Springer; Singapore: 2020. Restoring environmental flows for managing river ecosystems: global scenario with special reference to India; pp. 163–183. [ Google Scholar ]
FAO FAO Aquastat. 2019. http://www.fao.org/land-water/databases-and-software/aquastat/en/ Available online.
Gange Namami. Industrial effluent monitoring. 2020. https://nmcg.nic.in/NamamiGanga.aspx available at.
IEA . International Energy Agency; 2020. Global Energy Review 2020: The Impacts of the COVID-19 Crisis on Global Energy Demand and CO2 Emissions. (April 2020) [ Google Scholar ]
India Today India Today; 2020. Lockdown impact: Ganga water in Haridwar becomes ‘fit to drink’ after decades. https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/lockdown-impact-ganga-water-in-haridwar-becomes-fit-to-drink-after-decades-1669576-2020-04-22 April 22, 2020 available at.
Jain S. Hydrologic inputs for Ganga rejuvenation, presentation at the Future Ganga Workshop. 2015. https://www.ceh.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Future%20Ganga%20Workshop%20-%20Sharad%20Jain%20-%20NIH.pdf available at.
Kamboj N., Kamboj V. Water quality assessment using overall index of pollution in riverbed-mining area of Ganga-River Haridwar, India. Water Sci. 2019; 33 :65–74. [ Google Scholar ]
Khan M.R., Voss C.I., Yu W., Michael H.A. Water resources management in the Ganges Basin: a comparison of three strategies for conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water. Water Res. Manage. 2014; 28 :1235–1250. [ Google Scholar ]
MacDonald A.M., Bonsor H.C., Ahmed K.M., Burgess W.G., Basharat M., Calow R.C., Dixit A., Foster S.S., Gopal K., Lapworth D.J., Lark R.M. Groundwater quality and depletion in the Indo-Gangetic Basin mapped from in situ observations. Nat. Geosci. 2016; 9 :762–766. [ Google Scholar ]
Maheswaran R., Khosa R., Gosain A.K., Lahari S., Sinha S.K., Chahar B.R., Dhanya C.T. Regional scale groundwater modelling study for Ganga River basin. J. Hydrol. 2016; 541 :727–741. [ Google Scholar ]
Misra A.K. Impact of urbanization on the hydrology of Ganga Basin (India) Water Resour. Manag. 2011; 25 (2):705–719. [ Google Scholar ]
NASA NASA, 2020. 2020. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images
NWP . Ministry of Water Resources; Government of India: 2012. National Water Policy. [ Google Scholar ]
Pal S., Kundu S., Mahato S. Groundwater potential zones for sustainable management plans in a river basin of India and Bangladesh. J. Clean. Prod. 2020; 257 [ Google Scholar ]
Pandey J., Singh R. Heavy metals in sediments of Ganga River: up-and downstream urban influences. Appl Water Sci. 2017; 7 :1669–1678. [ Google Scholar ]
PIB Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Ministry of Water Resources; 2018. Nitin Gadkari says notification of E-flow for ganga is a significant step. https://pib.gov.in/newsite/PrintRelease.aspx?relid=184100 dated 10-October-2018 available at.
PIB . Press Information Bureau; Government of India: 2018. Achievements of Ministry of Water Resources, River Development and Ganga Rejuvenation During 2018. https://pibindia.wordpress.com/2018/12/19/achievements-of-ministry-of-water-resources-river-development-and-ganga-rejuvenation-during-2018/#more-19520 available at. [ Google Scholar ]
Sah R., Baroth A., Hussain S.A. First account of spatio-temporal analysis, historical trends, source apportionment and ecological risk assessment of banned organochlorine pesticides along the Ganga River. Environ. Pollut. 2020; 263 [ Google Scholar ]
Shah T., Rajan A. Cleaning the ganga: rethinking irrigation is key. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2019; 54 :57. [ Google Scholar ]
Sharma U., Dutta V. Establishing environmental flows for intermittent tropical rivers: why hydrological methods are not adequate? Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020; 17 :2949–2966. [ Google Scholar ]
Singh V. 2020. Healthy Snowfall Will Help Uttarakhand’s Glaciers, Water Woes, Mongabay March 2020. [ Google Scholar ]
Singh R., Pandey J. Non-point source-driven carbon and nutrient loading to Ganga River (India) Chem. Ecol. 2019; 35 (4):344–360. [ Google Scholar ]
Sinha R., Mohanta H., Jain V., Tandon S.K. Geomorphic diversity as a river management tool and its application to the Ganga River, India. River Res. and Applica. 2017; 33 :1156–1176. [ Google Scholar ]
Trivedi R.C. Water quality of the Ganga River—an overview. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management. 2010; 13 (4):347–351. [ Google Scholar ]
van der Vat M., Boderie P., Bons K., Hegnauer M., Hendriksen G., van Oorschot M., Warren A. Participatory modelling of surface and groundwater to support strategic planning in the Ganga Basin in India. Water. 2019; 11 :2443. [ Google Scholar ]
WII . Ganga Aqualife Conservation Monitoring Centre, Wildlife Institute of India; Dehradun: 2017. Aquatic Fauna of Ganga River: Status and Conservation. [ Google Scholar ]

Climate Change and River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges in Kanpur

Natural Resource Modeling, Vol. 36, e12370, 2023

15 Pages Posted: 14 Aug 2023

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal

Rochester Institute of Technology

Karima Kourtit

VU University Amsterdam

Peter Nijkamp

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, School of Business and Economics

Date Written: August 11, 2023

We provide a theoretical framework to analyze how climate change influences the Ganges and how this influence affects pollution in the river caused by tanneries in Kanpur, India. We focus on two tanneries, A and B, that are situated on the same bank of the Ganges in Kanpur. Both produce leather and leather production requires the use of noxious chemicals. Tannery A is situated upstream from tannery B. Tannery A's leather production depends on labor use but tannery B's leather production depends on labor use, the chemical waste generated by tannery A, and the natural pollution absorbing capacity of the Ganges. In this setting, we perform four tasks. First, we construct a metric that measures the climate change induced mean reduction in the natural capacity of the Ganges to absorb pollution in the time interval [0,t]. Second, we use this metric and determine the equilibrium production of leather by both tanneries in the benchmark case in which there is no pollution. Third, we ascertain how the benchmark equilibrium is altered when tannery B accounts for the negative externality foisted upon it by tannery A. Finally, we study the impact on leather production and on labor use when the two tanneries merge and then discuss the policy implications stemming from our research.

Keywords: Climate Change, Ganges River, Tannery, Unitization, Water Pollution

JEL Classification: Q25, Q54

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal (Contact Author)

Rochester institute of technology ( email ).

Department of Economics, RIT 92 Lomb Memorial Drive Rochester, NY NEW YORK 14623-5604 United States 5853134063 (Phone) 5854755777 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://people.rit.edu/aabgsh

VU University Amsterdam ( email )

De Boelelaan 1105 Amsterdam, ND North Holland 1081 HV Netherlands

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, School of Business and Economics ( email )

De Boelelaan 1105 Amsterdam, 1081HV Netherlands

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, io: regulation, antitrust & privatization ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

IO: Theory eJournal

Operations research ejournal, urban research ejournal, environment & natural resources ejournal, urban economics & regional studies ejournal, environmental economics ejournal, development economics: agriculture, natural resources, & environmental impact ejournal, development economics: regional & country studies ejournal, agricultural & natural resource economics ejournal, other environmental science research ejournal.

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Multivariate Analysis of Water Quality of Ganga River

Original Contribution
Published: 01 March 2021
Volume 102 , pages 539–549, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

Piyush Bagla ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1664-7787 1 ,
Kuldeep Kumar 1 ,
Nonita Sharma 1 &
Ravi Sharma 1

476 Accesses

5 Citations

Explore all metrics

With an increase in population and accelerated pace of industrialization, water quality is going to degrade day-by-day. The main source of water in India is from rivers. The Ganga River Basin is the world’s most populated and is home to half of India's population, including two-thirds of the nation’s poor. This paper highlights the utility of multivariate statistical techniques for evaluating, interpreting complex data sets and recognizing spatial differences in water quality for effective management of river water quality. A study was conducted to check the water quality in three different states of India, namely Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, by examining their various Physico-chemical parameters. These parameters were analyzed, and values obtained were compared with standard values. We have examined the causality relationship and correlation existence between Temp, pH, Dissolved Oxygen, Conductivity, Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Nitrate, Total Coliform and Fecal Coliform. Total Coliform and Fecal Coliform are strongly correlated with a value of 0.975, whereas Dissolved Oxygen and temperature have a negative correlation with a − 0.650 value. The analysis also reveals that Biochemical Oxygen Demand, Fecal Coliform and Total Coliform parameters impact the most in the degradation of water quality of the Ganga river water.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Assessment of Spatial and Temporal Changes in Water Quality of a Tropical River in Southern Western Ghats, Kerala, India, Using Physicochemical Quality Indices and Multivariate Analysis

Water quality assessment in the ecologically stressed lower and estuarine stretches of river Ganga using multivariate statistical tool

Appraisal of river water quality using multivariate statistics and water quality indices: a case of Hindon River (India)

S.K. Pandey, S. Tiwari, Physico-chemical analysis of ground water of selected area of Ghazipur city-A case study. Nat. Sci. 7 (1), 17–20 (2009)

Google Scholar

A.K. Chaurasia, H.K. Pandey, S.K. Tiwari, R. Prakash, P. Pandey, A. Ram, Groundwater quality assessment using water quality index (WQI) in parts of Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh, India. J. Geol. Soc. India 92 (1), 76–82 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-018-0955-1

Article Google Scholar

P. Kumar, R.K. Kaushal, A.K. Nigam, Assessment and management of Ganga River water quality using multivariate statistical techniques in India. Asian J. Water Environ. Pollut. 12 (4), 61–69 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3233/AJW-150018

D. Gupta, G. Singh, A.K. Patel, V. Mishra, An assessment of groundwater quality of varanasi district using water quality an assessment of groundwater quality of varanasi district using water quality index and multivariate statistical techniques. Int. J. Sci. Technol. 14 , 143–157 (2019)

T.A. Khan, Multivariate analysis of hydrochemical data of the groundwater in parts of Karwan-Sengar sub-basin, central Ganga Basin, India”. Glob. Nest J. 13 (3), 229–236 (2011). https://doi.org/10.30955/gnj.000653

S.P. Gorde, M.V. Jadhav, Assessment of water quality parameters: a review. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl. 3 (6), 2029–2035 (2013)

R. Chopra, G.K.-J. of E.S., Climatic, and undefined 2014, Assessment of groundwater quality in Punjab, India. academia.edu.

D. H. Schuettpelz, Fecal and total coliform tests in water quality evaluation (Research Report 42, Department of Natural Resources, Madison, WI, 1969). https://165.189.157.16/files/PDF/pubs/ss/SS0442.pdf . Accessed 26 Feb 2020

D. Bhardwaj, N. Verma, Research paper on analyzing impact of various parameters on water quality index. Int. J. Adv. Res. Comput. Sci. 8 (5), 21 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-4026-x

A.N. Singh, R. Shrivastava, D. Mohan, P. Kumar, Assessment of spatial and temporal variations in water quality dynamics of river Ganga in Varanasi. Pollution 4 (2), 239–250 (2018). https://doi.org/10.22059/poll.2017.240626.310

M.G.Y.L. Mahagamage, S.D.M. Chinthaka, P.M. Manage, Multivariate analysis of physico-chemical and microbial parameters of surface water in Kelani river basin Chemical modification of natural materials view project fluoride analysis of bevarages and fluoride removal methods View project multivariate analysis. Int. J. Multidiscip. Stud. 1 (1), 55–61 (2014). https://doi.org/10.4038/ijms.v1i1.37

N. Akhtar et al., Multivariate investigation of heavy metals in the groundwater for irrigation and drinking in Garautha Tehsil, Jhansi District, India. Anal. Lett. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/00032719.2019.1676766

A. Mishra, A. Mukherjee, B.D. Tripathi, Seasonal and temporal variations in physico-chemical and bacteriological characteristics of river ganga in Varanasi. Int. J. Environ. Res. 3 (3), 395–402 (2009). https://doi.org/10.12944/cwe.2.2.08

E.E. Leamer, Vector autoregressions for causal inference? Carnegie-Rochester Conf. Ser. Public Policy 22 , 255–304 (1985)

M. Maziarz, A review of the Granger-causality fallacy. J. Philos. Econ. Buchar. Acad. Econ. Stud. J. Philos. Econ. 8 (2), 86–105 (2015)

E.I. Obilor, E.C. Amadi, Test for significance of Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r). Int. J. Innov. Math. Stat. Energy Polic. 6 (1), 11–23 (2018)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Computer Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Jalandhar, India

Piyush Bagla, Kuldeep Kumar, Nonita Sharma & Ravi Sharma

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Piyush Bagla .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bagla, P., Kumar, K., Sharma, N. et al. Multivariate Analysis of Water Quality of Ganga River. J. Inst. Eng. India Ser. B 102 , 539–549 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40031-021-00555-z

Download citation

Received : 22 July 2020

Accepted : 01 February 2021

Published : 01 March 2021

Issue Date : June 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40031-021-00555-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Water quality
Physico-chemical parameters
Multivariate analysis
Ganga river basin
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

IMAGES

Ganga River Pollution
Case Study Of Water Pollution In Ganga River
(PDF) IMPACT OF GANGA POLLUTION AND REMEDIES
River Water Pollution
(PDF) Water Pollution Control -A Guide to the Use of Water Quality
Case study on: Ganga water pollution

VIDEO

Why Ganga Water Doesn't Spoil 😱
Ganga Water Pollution Case
गंगा जल का वैज्ञानिक महत्व
GANGA POLLUTION CASE
SCIENTISTS said GANGA JAL has special POWERS
‘Ganga: The River from the Skies’- Nat Geo Film

COMMENTS

Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of
However, due to pollution, today the regular consumption of Ganga water or taking dip in it may cause serious health effects including cancer. Ganga covers as much as 8,61,404 km 2 of drainage basin within the country which is 15th in Asia and 29th in the world (Joshi et al., 2009).
5 A Review on the Status of Ganga River with Reference To its Pollution
Fig.1: Various sources of pollution in river Ganga water. (3.1) Sewage pollution: The sewage treatment system is still in need of development because big cities along the river create millions of
Research on heavy metal pollution of river Ganga: A review
The tributaries of the Ganga account for 60% of the total water of the river. About 20% of Ganga water is fed by Ghaghara as against 16% by Yamuna [119]. The tributaries of Ganga have an important role in pollution of river Ganga because it transports considerable amounts of pollutants as well as heavy metals into the Ganga.
Potential Impacts of Climate and Land Use Change on the Water Quality
Agricultural runoff along with climate change further adds to the pollution risk in this industrialised stretch of Ganga. In this paper, we analyse the potential impacts of climate change and land ...
Toxic plastics choking the River Ganges
Polyethylene from discarded plastic bags, food-packaging films and milk bottles is increasingly gagging the Ganges river turning it into a toxic water body downstream, research shows. A survey of ...
Resolving the Ganges pollution paradox: A policy‐centric systematic
Pollution issues going on at the surface of the Ganges may also impact groundwater (Mariya et al., 2019), but as was the case in the previously discussed fieldwork and modeling sections of this paper, most groundwater pollution research from reviews are oriented around arsenic pollution. These recommendations normally involve behavioral changes ...
River Ganga pollution: Causes and failed management plans
Ganga water quality evaluated by the National Cancer Registry Programme (NCRP) and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) revealed that traces of metals, especially Hg, in Ganga water were higher than maximum permissible limits provided by WHO (1990) (Dwivedi et al., 2018). 4. Management and mitigation plans for river Ganga4.1.
Nutrient and microbial water quality of the upper Ganga River, India
The Ganga River is facing mounting environmental pressures due to rapidly increasing human population, urbanisation, industrialisation and agricultural intensification, resulting in worsening water quality, ecological status and impacts on human health. A combined inorganic chemical, algal and bacterial survey (using flow cytometry and 16S rRNA gene sequencing) along the upper and middle Ganga ...
Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of
Background: The water quality of Ganga, the largest river in Indian sub-continent and life line to hundreds of million people, has severely deteriorated. Studies have indicated the presence of high level of carcinogenic elements in Ganga water. Objectives: We performed extensive review of sources and level of organic, inorganic pollution and microbial contamination in Ganga water to evaluate ...
Story of the Ganga River: Its Pollution and Rejuvenation
The Ganga encounters about 15 tributaries during its journey from Gomukh to the Bay of Bengal, which contribute to 60% of its total water, making it the third largest river in the world in terms of the volume of water released (Zhang et al., 2019). In 2008, Ganga River was professed as the 'National River' of India.
Ganga River: A Paradox of Purity and Pollution in India due to
Abstract. In India, the river Ganga is believed as a goddess, and people worship it. Despite all the respect for the river, the river's condition is worsening, and we Indians are unable to maintain the purity of the river. The Ganga is a river of faith, devotion, and worship. Indians accept its water as "holy," which is known for its "curative ...
Physicochemical and biological analysis of river Yamuna at Palla
Data retrieval. Water quality data of Yamuna River at Palla station was obtained from Water Resources and Information System (WRIS), India, which is a centralized platform, acting as a database ...
Real-time assessment of the Ganga river during pandemic ...
In this study, four water quality parameters were reviewed at 14 stations of river Ganga in pre-, during and post-lockdown and these parameters were modeled by using different machine learning algorithms. Various mathematical models were used for the computation of water quality parameters in pre-, during and post- lockdown period by using Central Pollution Control Board real-time data ...
Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of
The municipal sewage is the major contributor to polluting the river Ganga followed by industrial effluents, agriculture runoff, pulp, and paper waste, pesticide, and fertilizer wastes (Das 2011).
Organic contaminants in Ganga basin: From the Green Revolution to the
Introduction. In recent decades, pollution of water bodies has become a matter of growing concern in the low- and middle-income countries. Rapid industrialization and population growth have increased the release of industrial and domestic effluents to surface water, jeopardizing aquatic ecosystems and compromising water quality (Paul, 2017).The Ganga basin, one of the most densely populated ...
Cleaning the River Ganga: Impact of lockdown on water quality and
To have a better understanding of the transformation in the quality of water in Ganga, this paper analyses historical data on water quality and compares with quality observed during the lockdown period based upon the real-time water monitoring data of the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and various state pollution control boards ...
Ganga River: A Paradox of Purity and Pollution in India due to
The Ganga is a river of faith, devotion, and worship. Indians accept its water as "holy," which is known for its "curative" properties. The river is not limited to these beliefs but is ...
Climate Change and River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges
First, we construct a metric that measures the climate change induced mean reduction in the natural capacity of the Ganges to absorb pollution in the time interval [0,t]. Second, we use this metric and determine the equilibrium production of leather by both tanneries in the benchmark case in which there is no pollution.
Multivariate Analysis of Water Quality of Ganga River
With an increase in population and accelerated pace of industrialization, water quality is going to degrade day-by-day. The main source of water in India is from rivers. The Ganga River Basin is the world's most populated and is home to half of India's population, including two-thirds of the nation's poor. This paper highlights the utility of multivariate statistical techniques for ...
Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of
The current review concluded that inorganic pollution in river Ganga water has increased several folds in last decade and conditions are even worst due to presence of carcinogenic elements (Cr, Cd, Pb, As). Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal are the most contaminated states. The level of Cd, Cr and Pb was maximum in Uttar Pradesh while As and Hg ...
Drinking water quality assessment of river Ganga in West Bengal, India
The study provides a base line assessment of the water quality of river Ganga for drinking.Water quality was marked as polluted and unfit for d. ... where the chemical industry discharges about 70% of the total waste water, followed by the pulp-paper industry with 20% discharge ... Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 24 (16),
PDF Pollution and Conservation of Ganga River in Modern India
Abstract- According to a World Bank Sponsored Study (State of Environment Report- U.P.) (In: Mallikarjun, 2003), pollution levels in the Ganga are contributing 9-12% of total disease burden in Uttar Pradesh (U.P.). The coliform bacteria levels are in excess of 2 lakh MPN as against the national water quality standard of 5000 (Mallikarjun, 2003).
Story of the Ganga River: Its Pollution and Rejuvenation
The main. industrial sectors responsible for Ganga 's pollution reportedly include sugar, distill-. ery, pulp and paper, tannery, textiles, thermal power plants, electro-processing. industries ...
Biosurfactants as an Alternative eco-friendly Solution for Water-in
Diesel engines are used extensively in heavy-duty transportation due to their high thermal efficiency and energy density, but they also contribute to environmental pollution. Water-in-diesel emulsions have emerged as an alternative method for decreasing NOx and emissions, but there are still obstacles to assuring engine performance and stability. Surfactants are used to stabilise the emulsion ...

Save citation to file

Add to My Bibliography

Ganga water pollution: A potential health threat to inhabitants of Ganga basin

Similar articles

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources

Other Literature Sources

Research Materials

Miscellaneous

We apologize for the inconvenience...

Physicochemical and biological analysis of river Yamuna at Palla station from 2009 to 2019

Similar content being viewed by others

Positive effects of COVID-19 lockdown on river water quality: evidence from River Damodar, India

Hydro-chemical characterization and irrigation suitability assessment of a tropical decaying river in India

Assessing heavy metal and physiochemical pollution load of Danro River and its management using floating bed remediation

Data retrieval

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Result and discussion

Dissolved oxygen (DO) saturation

Biological oxygen demand (BOD)

Chemical oxygen demand (COD)

Total alkalinity

Total dissolved solids (TDS)

Total coliform

Water discharge

Variability of DO, BOD, and COD

Data availability

Abbreviations

Acknowledgements

Author information

Contributions

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Additional information

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

This article is cited by

Quick links

Cleaning the River Ganga: Impact of lockdown on water quality and future implications on river rejuvenation strategies

Graphical abstract

1. Introduction

2. About the study area

3. Methodological approach

4. Flow obstructions and water abstractions

5. Environmental flow (e-flow) requirements and the prescribed flow standards

6. Major hot spots of water pollution

7. Impact of lockdown on water quality

8. Reasons for the improvement of water quality in Ganga during the lockdown period

8.2. Increase in the surface storages in the basin

8.3. Increase in baseflow due to harvesting season

8.4. Reduction in the discharge of wastewater from industrial and commercial units

8.5. Decrease in electricity demand

8.6. Complete restriction on other activities such as tourism, fairs, bathing and cloth washing

9. Impact of infrastructure put up by national schemes and action plans

10. Key lessons from the lockdown and future perspectives

10.1. Requirement of more stringent regulatory controls

10.2. Reducing the burden of water abstraction

10.3. Increasing the speed of project implementation

10.4. Redefining the standards for industries in view of the impact on water quality

10.5. Moving to ecological flow regimes from the current conservative e-flow estimates

10.6. Designing different strategies for hot-spots and grossly polluting industries (GPIs)

11. Conclusion

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Declaration of competing interest

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Climate Change and River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges in Kanpur

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal

Karima Kourtit

Peter Nijkamp

Amitrajeet A. Batabyal (Contact Author)

VU University Amsterdam ( email )

Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, School of Business and Economics ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

IO: Theory eJournal

Multivariate Analysis of Water Quality of Ganga River

Cite this article

Access this article

Similar content being viewed by others

Assessment of Spatial and Temporal Changes in Water Quality of a Tropical River in Southern Western Ghats, Kerala, India, Using Physicochemical Quality Indices and Multivariate Analysis