green accounting for indian states and union territories project · accounting for freshwater...
TRANSCRIPT
For further details. log on to
www.gistindia.org
This monograph is part of a larger effort to build, for India, an empirically based framework of 'green accounting' that would allow decision-makers to develop effective strategic responses to the depletion and accumulation of natural and human capital. In this monograph, we have attempted to adjust national and state accounts for the degradation in water quality over a ten-year period. We have specifically considered the quality changes in groundwater and surface water. The effort is to organize the complex database of water in India and analyse the trend in its quality over a period of time. The quality of water has been judged on well-accepted criteria suggested by government agencies. By adopting a replacement cost approach, the monetary value of the decline in water quality for each use has been estimated. This decline in quality has been treated in the same way as depreciation of man-made capital and has been adjusted against the state domestic products for each of India's states. This monograph should also be seen as an attempt to organize the complexities of information in the country's water sector. Of course, we recognize that the results need to be treated with caution due to data limitations and the difficulties with incorporating water quality data into the SEEA (System of Environment and Economic Accounting) framework.
Monograph 8
In common with most developing nations, India faces many trade-offs in its attempt to improve the living standards of its people. The trade-offs emerge in various arenas, and several mechanisms for decision-making (including political institutions) have been developed to help choose between competing alternatives. Unfortunately, most of these decision mechanisms do not take into account intergenerational choices, i.e. trade-offs between the needs of the present and the future generations. In our view, it is urgently necessary to develop a mechanism to do this because many of the choices we make today could severely affect the welfare of our children tomorrow.
Therefore, we propose to build a framework of national accounts that presents genuine net additions to national wealth. This system of environmentally-adjusted national income accounts will not only account for the depletion of natural resources and the costs of pollution but also reward additions to the stock of human capital.
The Green Accounting for Indian States and Union Territories Project (GAISP) aims to set up economic models for preparing annual estimates of ‘genuine savings’, i.e. true ‘value addition’, at both state and national levels. The publication of the results will enable policy-makers and the public to engage in a debate on the sustainability of growth as well as make cross-state comparisons. It is hoped that a policy consequence of the project is gradual increases in budgetary allocations for improvements in education, public health, and environmental conservation, all of which are key elements needed to secure India’s long-term future.
Green Accounting for Indian Statesand Union Territories Project
Pushpam Kumar
Sanjeev Sanyal
Rajiv Sinha
Pavan Sukhdev
March 2007
Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Monograph 8
GAISP (Green Accounting for Indian States Project)
Pushpam Kumar
Environmental Economist
Institute for Sustainable Water, Integrated Management and Ecosystem Research
(SWIMMER)
University of Liverpool, UK
Sanjeev Sanyal
Director, GAISP
Rajiv Sinha
Professor, Arizona State University, USA and Director, GAISP
Pavan Sukhdev
Director, GAISP
Project Sponsors
September 2007
© Green Indian States Trust, 2007
AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Mr Lalit Kumar, Senior Lecturer inBusiness Economics at the BRA College, University of Delhi, for his support with data andanalysis and compilation of information. Virginia Hooper (Research Associate, GIST), providedcritical research support to this project. We are thankful to her for this. We also thank Dr GilesAtkinson from the London School of Economics and Dr Nilanjan Ghosh (then at IIM [IndianInstitute of Management] Kolkota and TERI) for their constructive suggestions andcomments. Mr P Yeshuthasen, Trustee, GIST, deserves special thanks for his valuable supportand guidance on administrative and financial issues. We also thank TERI Press for their help.
Printed in India at Multiplexus India, Delhi
Tel. 2468 2100 or 2468 2111
Fax 2468 2144 or 2468 2145
India +91 • Delhi (0) 11
E-mail [email protected] www.teriin.org
Published byTERI PressThe Energy and Resources InstituteDarbari Seth BlockIHC ComplexLodhi RoadNew Delhi – 110 003India
forGreen Indian States Trust4 B, Cross StreetSrinagar ColonyChennai – 600 015, India
For further details, log on to
www.gistindia.org
Contents
List of acronyms.......................................................................... v
Background ............................................................................... vii
Introduction .................................................................................. 1
Scope of the monograph ................................................................. 2
Types of water accounts ................................................................. 3
Review of literature ........................................................................ 5
Quantity of groundwater in India................................................... 9
Quality of groundwater in India ..................................................... 10
Estimating surface water volume in India ....................................... 13
Estimation of economic value of quality loss (cost of treatment) ..... 35
Conclusion .................................................................................... 42
References ..................................................................................... 45
Bibliography ................................................................................... 47
Appendix 1 .................................................................................... 49
Appendix 2 .................................................................................... 52
Appendix 3 .................................................................................... 52
Appendix 4 .................................................................................... 55
Appendix 5 .................................................................................... 56
Appendix 6 .................................................................................... 57
Appendix 7 .................................................................................... 60
Appendix 8 .................................................................................... 63
Appendix 9 .................................................................................... 66
Appendix 10 .................................................................................. 69
Appendix 11 .................................................................................. 70
List of acronyms
BOD biochemical oxygen demand
CGWB Central Ground Water Board
COD chemical oxygen demand
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
GAISP Green Accounting for Indian States and Union TerritoriesProject
GDP gross domestic product
GNP gross national product
GSDP gross state domestic product
MAR mean annual run-off
MPN most probable number
NAMEA National Accounting Matrix Environmental Accounting
SEEA System of Environment and Economic Accounting
SNA System of National Accounts
TDS total dissolved solid
TVC total variable count
Accounting for freshwater quality in Indiavi
viiAccounting for freshwater quality in India
Background In common with most developing nations, India faces many trade-offsin its attempt to reduce poverty and enhance the living standards of itspeople. There is a need for an empirical basis on which to base policydecisions on trade-offs between the many competing priorities of adeveloping nation, including inter-generational claims (trade-offsbetween the needs of present and future generations). Availablemeasures of development, including the current SNA (System ofNational Accounts) of the United Nations with its primary focus onGDP (gross domestic product) growth rates, do not capture many vitalaspects of national wealth, such as changes in the quality of health,changes in the extent of education, and changes in the quality andextent of environmental resources. All of these aspects significantlyimpact on the well-being of India’s citizens generally, and most of theseare critical to poverty alleviation specifically, providing incomeopportunities and livelihood security for the poor. GDP accounts andtheir state-level equivalents – GSDP (gross state domestic product)accounts – are therefore, inadequate as toolkits for comprehensivelyevaluating the trade-offs encountered by policy-makers in India.
The ‘Green Accounting for Indian States and Union TerritoriesProject’ or GAISP was constituted in 2004 largely in recognition of thereality that though ‘GDP growth percentages’ are substantiallymisleading as yardsticks of growth, development, wealth or well-being,planners, policy-makers, businesses, and the media continue to usethem extensively, even uniquely. GAISP proposes to build a frameworkof adjusted national accounts that represents genuine net additions tonational wealth. These are sometimes referred to as ‘green accounts’ inrelevant literature. Such a system of environmentally-adjusted NIAs(national income accounts) will not only reflect in economic terms thedepletion of natural resources and the health costs of pollution but willalso reward additions to the stock of human capital through education.Green accounts for India and its states will provide a much bettermeasure of development than GDP (national income) growthpercentages and GSDP (state income) growth measures and willencourage the emergence of sustainable development as a focus ofeconomic policy at the operative state level.
GAISP aims to set up top-down economic models for state-wise annualestimates of adjusted GSDP for all major Indian states and UnionTerritory economies. A top-down or macroeconomic approach isadapted to model adjustments to GDP/GSDP accounts, for tworeasons. First, it has the advantage of providing a consistent andimpartial national framework to value hitherto unaccounted aspects of
Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Accounting for freshwater quality in Indiaviii
national and state wealth and production. Second, it optimizes theexisting research, which is already extensive but not yet tied together ina manner that makes it useful for policy analysis. The publication of theresults and methodology of GAISP will provide a much-improvedtoolkit for India’s policy-makers to evaluate in economic terms thetrade-offs they face. It will also engage policy-makers and the public in adebate on the sustainability of economic growth, both at a national levelas well as through inter-state comparisons.
The first phase of GAISP comprises the publication of the followingeight monographs, each of which evaluates a particular area or relatedset of areas of adjustments to GSDP accounts.1 The value of timber, carbon, fuelwood, and non-timber forest
produce in India’s forests
2 Estimating the value of agricultural cropland and pasture land inIndia
3 The value of India’s sub-soil assets
4 The value of biodiversity in India’s forests
5 Estimating the value of educational capital formation in India
6 Investments in health and pollution control and their value to India
7 Accounting for the ecological services of Indian forests: soilconservation, water augmentation, and flood prevention
8 Accounting for freshwater quality in India
All adjustments calculated in these monographs apply to the same set ofGSDP accounts (year ended March 2003) and are additive. GAISP’swebsite <www.gistindia.org> will feature a running record ofcumulative state-wise adjustments to these GSDP accounts. To a first-order approximation, these adjustments may be added or subtracted asindicated to GSDP growth percentages for 2002/03. The final report ofGAISP will summarize and consolidate the work done on these eightmonographs and include ‘adjusted GSDP’ measures for the states andsignificant union territories comprising India, as well as provide acommentary on the policy implications of the results.
Introduction Water is one of the fundamental natural resources on which the sustenanceof society depends. Though marine water has its own role to play, it is thequantity and quality of fresh water that are of primary importance tosociety. In the context of a typical ecosystem, water has a dual role—it is notonly a service from ecosystems but also a rich ecosystem in itself (MA2005). In this monograph, water has been considered as a provisioningoutput used for irrigation, drinking, and industry.
Precise estimation of the availability of fresh water at global and nationallevels is quite complex, although estimates fall within the range of 33 500–47 000 km3 (cubic kilometres) per year at the global level. This is long-term mean run-off (Doll, Kaspar, and Lehner 2003; Shiklomanov andRodda 2003). Water is the most challenging resource that can bemanipulated into an accounting framework due to its intrinsic properties.It flows, changes state, and is available seasonally. In addition, a largeportion of the water theoretically available, is bound up in ice and snow orruns off the surface as floods. When compiling water accounts, it isimportant to understand the hydrological cycle and describe what thehydrological system means within a territory of reference. Thehydrological or water cycle has been defined as ‘the succession of stagesthrough which water passes from the atmosphere to the earth and back tothe atmosphere: evaporation from the land or sea or inland water,condensation from clouds, precipitation, accumulation in the soil or inbodies of water, and re-evaporation’ (UNESCO, cited in MA 2005).
In order to prepare accounts of water assets under the United NationsSystem of National Accounts (also known as SEEA [System ofEnvironment and Economic Accounting]), the asset classification ofwater resources in SEEA should reflect those components of thehydrological system that are available for water abstraction and providedirect input into the economy.
Although the interaction between the economy and the water sector isobvious, a clear-cut understanding of the relationship is important fromthe accounting point of view. Figure 1 provides the schematic of theconceptual linkages between water and economic sectors.
The economy returns water to the hydrological system through variousflows including returns of waste water to aquifers, rivers, lakes, andoceans; returns to soil and water bodies from irrigation activities; andlosses in transportation (supply, sewerage pipes, and so on). These returnflows are an input to the hydrological system and become a resource (evenif often of lower quality) for subsequent uses. Imports/exports of water toand from the economy are considered as direct inflows/outflows of water
Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Accounting for freshwater quality in India2
Scope of the
monograph
through pipes from and to the economies of other territories. These days,export of primary products – especially foodgrains, meat, and dairyproducts – are also considered as export/import of water, which is knownas ‘virtual water’. However, we have not considered this aspect in thecurrent monograph.
Growing concerns about water scarcity and water quality issues have ledto the documentation of the flows of water within and between theenvironment and the economy. This has been achieved by formatting dataabout water into standard accounting tables. Organizations such as theUnited Nations and Eurostat have made guidelines to enable countries toprepare accounts for water, which are similar in structure and,therefore, comparable.
Accounting for water and the estimation of the depletion of freshwaterstocks and degradation of water quality help in rectifying theasymmetry between the adjustment of depreciation of man-made andnatural capital. Calculation of sustainable GNP (gross nationalproduct), commonly known as green accounting, clearly providesrationale for estimation and adjustment of depreciation of naturalcapital against the conventional national income accounts (Bartlemus,Stahmer, and Tongeren 1998; Common and Stagl 2005; Hamilton1998; Pearce, Markandya, and Barbier 1989)
Figure 1
Economy–water
interaction
This monograph first describes the popular types of accounting usuallyfollowed in case of freshwater resources. Second, it reviews some of thesuccessful examples of accounting done in select countries from all overthe world and focuses on lessons learnt from doing such an exercise in adeveloping country like India. Third, the change in the quality of water
3Accounting for freshwater quality in India
over the period 1993–2003 has been computed for surface water andgroundwater. Fourth, the deviation from the national standard(acceptable limit) has been calculated. Fifth, the costs of necessaryintervention on account of incremental pollution from the acceptablelimit have been estimated by following the replacement costs couched inmitigating expenditure method. Here, different technologies, theirefficacy, and so on have been given due consideration. We get a range ofvalues of averting expenditure and the average has been calculated. Thisfigure has been equated with the damage to the water resources of thecountry during 1993–2003. And finally, they have been adjusted againstthe net state domestic product for Indian states and union territories.
Types of water
accounts
Water accounts need to follow the principles of both the economy andthe hydrological cycle. They exclude flows of water that exist solelywithin the environment and concentrate on water available forextraction. There are two main accounting tables used in the nationaland state water accounts: asset classification tables and physical flowaccounts. Usually, supply and use tables are also produced, but thismonograph does not focus on them.
Asset classification These tables include those sources of water, which areavailable for abstraction and use within the economy. They compriseopening and closing accounts that document the flow of water to andfrom the environment and within the economy.
Physical flow accounts These accounts describe the whole system of flow ofwater between the environment and the economy, and within theeconomy. The hydrological cycle suggests that water can be found inmany forms, from vapour through to ice. For economic purposes, water isonly considered when it is available for extraction. These supplies includegroundwater and different categories of surface water like rivers, lakes,reservoirs, and dams.
Some basic concepts It is relatively simple to calculate the amount of water available in lakes,dams, and reservoirs compared to groundwater and rivers. Groundwaternot only flows but the size and porosity of aquifers (and hence the totalavailable volume of water) can be difficult to determine. To gain acomplete understanding of a particular aquifer requires expensiveinvestigation, so often, simple models and approximations are used. Forrivers, two methods can be used to calculate the volume of water. The firstuses the volume of the river channel as a proxy for water volume. This canbe problematic for ephemeral rivers, and so the MAR (mean annual run-off) may be used instead. This discharge figure is more accurate, althoughmore difficult to measure, as a number of measurements must be takenover the course of the year.
Most countries do not include water trapped in the soil or snowfields orwater held as glaciers in their accounts because in general, this watercannot be abstracted. There are, however, exceptions depending on the
Accounting for freshwater quality in India4
particular scenario in a given country. For example, in countrieswhere snowmelt contributes to water supplies later in the year,snowfields are included as stocks.
The asset classification tables focus on precipitation, inflows fromother countries, and outflows to the sea as well as abstraction andresidual returns. A hidden but substantial loss of water occurs throughthe evaporation from water bodies, plants, and soil. It is, therefore,important to describe precipitation net of evapotranspiration or includeevapotranspiration as a loss from the water supply.
The quantity of water available for use will, on average, remain the sameyear on year. This is because the average precipitation remains the same.In other words, water is a renewable resource in terms of volume. Theexception is groundwater. These stocks are replenished by rechargefrom precipitation that infiltrates into aquifers. These resources can beconsidered to be ‘mined’ or used as a non-renewable resource ifextraction occurs faster than recharge. A second example of ‘mining’groundwater occurs if the aquifer is geologically confined and cannot benaturally recharged.
Quality vs quantity
accounts
Assessing water quality in terms of an accounting framework requiresconsideration of the number of different uses that water can be put to.Obviously, water used as an industrial coolant need not have the samequality as water used for drinking or bathing. Thus, water can have anumber of economic uses before it is finally discharged back to theenvironment. Ideally, these different quality requirements should bereflected in the accounts. On paper, quality accounts are very similar toquantity accounts. SEEA and Eurostat guidelines essentially describethe same method for compiling these tables. Water quality is measuredover a number of criteria (relevant to the particular state or country), forexample, BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) or total coliforms.Acceptable levels of these pollutants are set for different quality classesof water. These quality classes are assigned to volumes of water and theinformation can be represented in a table that is very similar to thetables for quantity.
The simplicity of the tables masks the difficulties involved in assigningquality measurements to flowing water. These issues are still beingresolved, although the method used by the IFEN (French Institute forEnvironment) (standard river units method) has produced good resultsin France. There remain problems, however, in terms of the spatial andtemporal variations in water quality, which need to be representedin the accounts.
5Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Review of
literature
Water accounts published by different countries vary enormously inboth their scope and focus. This lack of consistency reflects theavailability of data and the specific water-related issues (determined, forexample, by climate, the type of industry, and the provision of wastewater treatment) in a particular country. The purpose of this review is tocompare how both the quantity and quality of fresh water have beenassessed in a selection of countries and to give a brief overview of anyadditional information provided in the reports published by thesecountries.
Many of the published water accounts are affected by a lack of relevantdata and, understandably, focus on the areas where there is mostinformation. For example, in New Zealand, the accounts (produced byStatistics New Zealand) include detailed studies on every aspect offreshwater stocks including snow, glaciers, and soil water, but as yethave not incorporated water quality in an accounting framework(Woods and Henderson 2003; Statistics New Zealand 2004)
Measuring the quantity and quality of inland water is difficult becauseof the flowing nature of water (rivers and groundwater), the temporalvariations in groundwater reserves and river discharge, and the logisticsof creating a suitable sampling network. These factors are complicatedfurther because agencies tend to collect information in terms ofdifferent geographical regions (river basins, water authorities or states),and it is difficult to compare these data sets with one another.
Australia has published water accounts since the mid-1990s. Waterresources are of great concern because of the continued depletion ofgroundwater reserves and the recent severe drought. Many of thesereserves are being used in an unsustainable manner and this willundoubtedly cause problems for future generations. The aim of thewater accounts is to create opening and closing stocks of the totalamount of water in terms of both surface water and groundwater, andthen to assemble supply and use tables (flow tables) for industry anddomestic use. The accounts are based on the framework suggested bythe SNA (System of National Accounts) 1993 and SEEA 2003 reports.Although most of the information is collected on a river basin scale, thedata has been collated by state to provide a more informative picture.
Water stocks are represented by the surface water and groundwaterasset tables, which are combined to form annual water balance tables.The amount of water stored in dams is also included in the annualwater balance.
Surface water is measured by considering MAR. This is measured as thedischarge of the river at a specified point and gives a goodapproximation of total surface flow. Considerations of the temporalvariation in water flow (due to seasonal changes in precipitation andevaporation) are incorporated into the results. The water flow tables
Accounting for freshwater quality in India6
indicate the amount of water supplied from the environment toindustry, households, and the government. The amount of waterreturned to the environment from these sectors is also assessed(McLennan 2000).
Eventually, Australia would like to incorporate an assessment of waterquality into their annual water accounts. The latest accounts (2000/01)have included an assessment of groundwater quality in terms of salinity,but this has not been fully incorporated into the accounting frameworkas yet (Trewin 2004).
Sweden is yet another significant example that does accounting for freshwater. The country has produced physical environment accounts since1993. It first attempted to compile water accounts in 1999 by using datafrom 1995 and followed the NAMEA (National Accounting MatrixEnvironmental Accounting) framework. The accounts concerned thephysical quantity of water flowing within the environment and theeconomy, and did not include an assessment of water quality (Branvall,Eriksson, Johansson, et al. 1999). New accounts for 2000 have now beenpublished and include more detailed information. The new accountstructure follows the water accounting guidelines developed byEurostat.
The main focus of the accounts is the construction of supply and the useof tables for physical and monetary data with respect to waterabstraction, use, waste water generation, and waste water treatment. Incomparison with other countries, such as New Zealand and SouthAfrica, a great deal of attention has been paid to assessing both the costof the water supplied to the user and the cost of water treatment.
Sweden abstracts large quantities of water from the sea, which is used asa coolant in the power industry. Sea water abstraction is, therefore,included in the national accounts; this aspect of water resourceaccounting is quite different from many countries where only inlandwater systems are represented in the accounting system (althoughDenmark also included sea water and the UK defines coastal water as aresource) (Eurostat and the European Commission 2002). Sweden alsochooses to disregard water used by the hydropower industry from itsnational accounts. This is because it is the potential energy of water thatis deemed to be the commodity rather than water itself. This is in directcontrast to New Zealand where water from hydro-generation companiesconstitutes a large part of the accounts.
The Swedish accounts include detailed assessments according toindustry type. There is information on the amount of water abstractedand used by each industry, the quantity of waste water discharged, andmeasurements of the levels of four different pollutants within this water.
7Accounting for freshwater quality in India
As with many of the national water account initiatives, there areomissions caused by lack of data. For example, no recent surveys havebeen conducted into the amount of water required for irrigation andlivestock. Branvall, Eriksson, Johansson, et al. (1999) have usedirrigation data from 1985 and produced an estimate for livestockthrough analysis of the number and type of livestock currently beingraised in Sweden (analogous to the method used in New Zealand). Thereport also acknowledges that there is little data with which to evaluateexpenditure on ‘own abstraction of water’ by industry.
Water quality issues have received a significant amount of attention inSweden, where there are strict water quality targets that are due to bemet by 2015. There is particular concern about the quality of the waterdischarged to the sea and its effect on the sustainability of aquaticecosystems. However, the quality of the inland water has not beenmeasured in a systematic manner (as compared to attempts in SouthAfrica and France); instead, data related to the composition of wastewater discharged from industry and water treatment plants has beencollected. The report focuses on the levels of BOD, COD (chemicaloxygen demand), N (nitrogen), and P (phosphorus) in water. Theseconstitute emission (or discharge) accounts and although they areundoubtedly informative, they do not have the scope that directmeasurements of water quality would allow.
In the Mediterranean region, Spain’s account for fresh water is worthmentioning. Water resources in Spain are under severe strain due toexpansions in agriculture and tourism (two industries that are heavilyreliant on water). The future of these industries is dependent upon goodwater resource management. For example, in 1999, over 70% of thetotal water used was for irrigation.
Spain has produced water satellite accounts for 1999 based on theNAMEA framework. Physical water accounts are in terms of fourdifferent sectors. They consider the abstraction, use, supply, anddemand of water, and the discharge of waste water into the rivers. Datacan also be found from 1997 to 2001 on the balance of watermovements between the economy and the environment for differenteconomic activities.
The Spanish accounts reviewed here have not attempted to quantify thetotal stocks of water in Spain in terms of surface water, groundwater orother categories of water. No mention has been made of balancing itemssuch as evapotranspiration from crops or the incorporation of water intoproducts. Instead, the accounts focus on the total amount abstracted foreach industry and the type of water abstracted (that is, suitable fordrinking, industry, and so on).
Water quality has been addressed in the form of emission accountsof waste water and the composition of this water in terms of metals
Accounting for freshwater quality in India8
(total), N, P, BOD, and COD. Where possible, this data has beendivided into regions. For example, there are tables of water use by state(Instituto Nacional 2001).
South Africa has produced both water quantity and quality accounts for2000. The aim is to eventually combine these reports into an overallwater account, but this has not been achieved yet. The accounts sufferfrom lack of available data with regard to many common qualityindicators but provide a sound basis for future assessment.
Water quality accounts are generally constructed for a particular sector.For example, the water quality standards for domestic use are morestringent than those for industrial purposes. South Africa uses fourcategories for water use: domestic, industrial, agricultural, andrecreational. Once quality classes have been established for the relevantparameters (for example, BOD, suspended solids, and pH), they areincorporated into an accounting structure similar to an asset account
South Africa has followed the French (IFEN) method for assigningquality to inland waters. This method has been used successfully in theUK and Slovenia. Quality measurements are taken at point locations.The data is assigned to a quantity that represents the total flow of waterat that point. The EuroWaterNet agency uses the Standard River Unit of1 km.m3 (cubic metre)/s. Using this method, stretches of inland water ofdifferent size with different flow rates can be aggregated.
Measurement of water quality involves the assessment of many differentparameters. In South Africa, there is a well-established network tomeasure the inorganic aspects of water quality such as salinity. There arealso developing networks to measure eutrophication andmicrobiological quality of inland water (although the extension of thesenetworks is hindered by the cost of sampling and analysis). Plans arealso under way to develop a monitoring system for heavy metal andorganic pollutants (measurement of radioactive contamination is onlyperformed in areas where there are known problems (Statistics SouthAfrica 2000). In general, most of the water in South Africa falls into thesecond quality class (in terms of chemical indicators). There are,however, concerns in some areas about faecal pollution from humansettlements and high TDS (total dissolved solid) due to the dry climatein the interior of the country.
It is clear from this review that different countries take different routesto account for fresh water. Some of the countries do only physicalaccounting but they do acknowledge the need for monetary accounts inorder to have a meaningful impact on sectoral and macro-policies ofthe changes in the stock and flow of water resources. In most of thecases, availability and type of data determine the choice ofmethodology employed.
9Accounting for freshwater quality in India
It is certainly true that in many areas of India (including parts ofRajasthan, Haryana, Punjab, and Tamil Nadu), groundwater resourcesare being used in an unsustainable manner. This is plainly evident fromthe lowering of the water table, which is particularly obvious when wellsrun dry and boreholes have to be sunk deeper. This reality is not obviousfrom most published government figures pertaining to the groundwaterassets of the country, as they tend to focus on India’s availablerechargeable groundwater resources. In part, this is due to the nature ofgroundwater assets. Precipitation, and hence surface water flow, allows alevel of recharge to occur in unconfined aquifers. In other words,groundwater resources are in some sense renewable. This statementcomes with caveats: aquifers need to be unconfined (that is, water fromthe surface is able to percolate through the rock strata to reach theaquifer) and water extraction should not exceed the volume of recharge.
A further factor to consider is the ‘invisible’ character of groundwater. It isnot clear how much water is held in aquifers and it is expensive to fullyinvestigate this complex underground system.
For the purpose of this report, we are concerned with the availablegroundwater volume, but it is worth mentioning that often a moreimportant concept is the depth to water from the surface. As noted byMoench (2000), overextraction of groundwater and the associated waterlevel decline can affect the sustainability of uses that are dependent ongroundwater long before the groundwater itself is exhausted. For example,groundwater flows, which contribute to rivers, are affected when the depthto the water table is lowered. Box 1 gives more information about thecomplex issues involved in estimating available groundwater resources.
� Assessing groundwater volumes is difficult due to methodological problems and the
availability of data. This translates into large uncertainties in both the measurement of
recharge volumes and the assessment of extraction levels.
� The replenishable groundwater resource is calculated using the ‘Water Table’ method. Here,
the depth to the water table is measured before and after the monsoon. The estimated area of
the aquifer multiplied by the increase in water level gives the volume of water replenished. This
figure is stated as the groundwater resource of the area.
Total replenishable volume: 432 BCM (billion cubic metres) per year
Total volume to a depth of 450 m: 10 812 BCM
� Measuring extraction is complex due to the number of private wells for both agricultural and
domestic use. Many proxies are used to give an estimation of extraction. Examples include the
area under irrigation and well census figures.
Data transparency
The volume of available groundwater in an area is a politically sensitive issue. Funding for
groundwater development is dependent on the percentage of the groundwater being extracted.
This leads to great pressure on groundwater professionals to adjust figures to prevent regions from
changing category in terms of groundwater development.
Sources Central Ground Water Board (1995) and Central Pollution Control Board (2004 a).
Box 1 Problems in estimating groundwater quantity
Quantity of
groundwater in
India
Accounting for freshwater quality in India10
Quality of
groundwater in
India
In 1994, the CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) analysedgroundwater in 22 regions that had been identified as ‘problem areas’ interms of groundwater quality. The data from these surveys was collated intoa comprehensive report, detailing the main areas of concern and givingrecommendations for future action. These 22 areas cover a number ofstates and the quality problems identified fall into many categories. Some ofthe pollutants arise from natural sources but the overwhelming majorityowe their origin to industrial discharge, domestic sewage, and by-productsfrom agricultural activities. Common problems are high total coliformcounts, high TDS, pesticide contamination, and the presence of heavymetals and fluoride. Tables 1–3 provide details in this regard.
Groundwater once contaminated is difficult to clean, so water has to betreated once it has been pumped from the wells. Many of the purificationprocedures are very expensive, especially for the more toxic contaminantssuch as heavy metals (Appendix 1).
Concern over groundwater pollution has risen dramatically during thepast few years. It was once assumed that these water supplies wereprotected from pollution by virtue of being underground. However, ithas since been recognized that pollutants can seep into aquifers frompoint sources such as leaking landfill sites and from more diffusedsources such as agricultural run-off. In addition, some naturallyoccurring pollutants have been concentrated due to overextraction.Groundwater pollution is potentially very serious as many communitiesrely solely on these water supplies especially in the dry season.Parameters of pressing concern are the biological contaminants asmeasured by total coliforms; pesticides such as DDT (dichloro–diphenyl–trichloroethane) and aldrin; heavy metals such as mercury,lead, and arsenic; metals such as iron and manganese; halogens such asfluorine; and nitrates. Salinity levels are also increasing due to problemssuch as sea-water ingress and returns of irrigation water, leading to areduction in water quality.
Estimation of
groundwater quality
11Accounting for freshwater quality in India
The quality data has been compiled by using the mean values over thespecified time period for each sample location within the target region.These are normally tube wells and dug wells, and the water supplied isused for a range of purposes including drinking, bathing, and irrigation.These values have been averaged to give a mean value for the area as awhole. This approach is limited because adjacent groundwater wells canhave vastly different levels of contamination due to complexities in theaquifer system, hydro-geologic setting, and properties of thecontaminant. Tables 2–4 show the breakdown of this information byproblem area, contaminant, and relation to the acceptable limits whileTables 5–10 provide the information in the sequence by state.
Table 1
Water pollution source in states
State Area Pollution source and industry type
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam Iron and zinc processing, petro-chemicals, fertilizer, untreated municipal sewage
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram Leather manufacture, slaughter houses, pesticide, pharmaceuticals
Assam Digboi Oil refinery, municipal sewage
Bihar Dhanbad Coal mining and washing, steel, fertilizer, cement plant, coke plant, explosives
Delhi Najafgarh Agricultural run-off, domestic sewage, insecticide, electro-plating, caustic soda,
dumping of solid waste
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb Engineering and pharmaceutical industries, agricultural run-off
Himachal Pradesh Parwano Electro-plating, pharmaceuticals, pesticide, sewage, agricultural run-off
Karnataka Bhadravathi Paper, iron and steel, municipal sewage, agricultural run-off
Kerala Greater Cochin Sea-water intrusion, chemical industries, insecticide production, refinery,
gypsum dumps
Maharashtra Chembur Petroleum refinery, petro-chemicals, fertilizer, thermal power plant, sea-water
ingress, municipal sewage
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda Distilleries, dye intermediates, pharmaceutical intermediates, agricultural run-off
Madhya Pradesh Korba Power plants, aluminium industry, explosives, coal mining, municipal sewage
Orissa Angul–Talcher Coal mining, power plants, fertilizer production, chemicals, smelting, heavy
water
Punjab Govindgarh Electro-plating, steel, metal processing, wood industries
Rajasthan Jodhpur Agricultural run-off, textiles, engineering, dye, plastics and oil
Rajasthan Pali Domestic effluent, agricultural run-off, textile industries
Tamil Nadu Manali Chemicals, fertilizers and petro-chemicals, sea-water ingress
Tamil Nadu North Arcot Tanneries, match industry, dying units, municipal sewage
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli Aluminium, carbon, pesticides, chemicals, coal mining, power plants
West Bengal Durgapur Metal and coal-handling industries
West Bengal Howrah Foundries, electro-plating
Source CPCB (1995)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India12
Table 2 shows the groundwater volume for each study area. These werecalculated by using the ratio of study area to state area and multiplyingby the total volume of groundwater in the state. In some cases, where thesize of the study area was unknown, district area was used as the closestapproximation.
The nature of pollutants differ across states, and different states havedifferent types of problems; for example, Punjab faces the presence oflead in its water while the data from Madhya Pradesh shows manganese,and Karnataka is struggling with the presence of zinc. The concentrationof heavy metal pollution is given in Table 3. Table 4 shows the deviation ofmetal contaminant levels from the acceptable limit given by the CPCB.Pollutants showing positive values reflect pollution of the groundwater.
Other criteria of describing the quality of groundwater have beencompiled, and their deviation from nationally acceptable limit hasbeen calculated. The main criteria and chemical parameters are TDS,N, Cl (chlorine), coliforms, and pesticides (aldrin, DDT) (Table 5).Tables 6 and 7 are self-explanatory as far as the spread and types ofpollutants across the states are concerned. Problems seem to bepervasive and alarming.
Table 2
Groundwater volumes in problem areas
Total
Groundwater Volume in
Study area State area in the state study area
State Area (km2) (km2) (MCM) (MCM)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 93.44 275 069 35 290 11.99
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram 70 275 069 35 290 8.98
Assam Digboi (Tinsukia) 3 790 78 438 24 720 1 194.43
Bihar Dhanbad 2 885 94 163 33 520 1 027.00
Delhi Najafgarh 832 1 483 290 162.70
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb (Sirmaur) 2 825 55 673 370 18.77
Himachal Pradesh Parwano (Solan) 1 936 55 673 370 12.87
Karnataka Bhadravathi 39.95 191 791 16 900 3.52
Kerala Greater Cochin 187 38 863 7 900 38.01
Maharashtra Chembur 20 307 713 37 870 2.46
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda 4 861 308 000 50 890 803.17
Madhya Pradesh Korba, 284.56 308 000 50 890 47.02
Orissa Angul–Talcher 2 511.32 155 707 20 000 322.57
Punjab Govindgarh 7.04 50 362 18 660 2.61
Rajasthan Jodhpur 40 342 239 12 710 1.49
Rajasthan Pali 3 087.96 342 239 12 710 114.68
Tamil Nadu Manali (Chengai MCR District) 7 863 130 058 26 390 1 595.48
Tamil Nadu North Arcot 5 887 130 058 26 390 1 194.53
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli (Mirzapur) 4 952.5 238 566 72 000 1 494.68
West Bengal Durgapur 154 88 752 23 090 40.07
West Bengal Howrah 1 474 88 752 23 090 383.48
MCM — million cubic metres
Source CPCB (1995)
13Accounting for freshwater quality in India
In addition to the areas listed in the CPCB report, water salinity hasbeen observed as a major problem in some states (Box 2).
Estimating
surface water
volume in India
Assessing the amount of available surface water by state has proved farmore difficult than estimating groundwater volume. Surface water data ispublished in terms of river basins and these invariably do not match stateboundaries. In addition, the total amount of surface water available foreach state is a classified information, not generally available.
In order to provide estimates of available surface water for each state, acombination of approaches has been adopted. While compiling this table, it hasbeen assumed that the total amount of surface water available each year does
� Saline groundwater, a feature of both inland and coastal states, is the result of a variety of
factors. These include residue from irrigation waters, industrial pollution, and reversal of the
hydraulic gradient in aquifers leading to sea-water ingress. The increasing levels of salinity
have wide–ranging impacts on agriculture and health.
� It is difficult to assess the extent of saline groundwater because it can occur in particular
horizons or be pervasive across entire aquifer systems. The extent of the problem is
controlled by the characteristics of the aquifer and the local geology.
� The use of saline water for irrigation affects crop yield and quality, and the characteristics of
the soil. The effect on crop yield can, however, be mitigated by cultivating species that are
less sensitive to saline conditions.
� The high sodium levels associated with increased salinity affect the behaviour of clay
particles in the soil, reducing drainage and irrigation efficiency.
Coastal salinity ingress
Many coastal regions are supplied with fresh water by aquifers that are in contact with the sea.
These coastal aquifers are a vital source of fresh water but are under threat as overextraction
causes the hydraulic balance between fresh and salt water to be reversed. This can lead to the
interface between the two waters moving landwards producing a salinity ingress. As little as 2%
contamination by sea water can render freshwater sources non-potable (CPCB 2003).
� Measurement of either total dissolved solid content or electrical conductivity gives an
indication of the salinity level. Here the groundwater has been assessed using electrical
conductivity.
� Acceptable limits of conductivity vary between regulatory bodies, particularly in terms of
water for irrigation. This is due to the varying sensitivities of crops to saline water and so in
effect a range of waters can be used. The CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) gives a
value of less than 2 dS (deci-Siemens)/m (or 2000 mhos/cm) for raw waters used for
organized community water supplies and 2.25 dS/m as an acceptable limit for irrigation
waters. However, an electrical conductivity of 4 dS/m is acceptable in special planned cases
where the limits can be relaxed.
� Many states have chosen to define the groundwater as saline if the value of electrical
conductivity exceeds 3.46 dS/m.
Box 2 A s u m m a r y o f t h e s a l i n i t y p r o b l e m i n I n d i a
Although there are many different water quality criteria to beconsidered at any one time, it only requires one parameter to exceedacceptable limits for the water to be deemed polluted.
Accounting for freshwater quality in India14
Table 3
Metal and heavy metal contamination in groundwater
Lead Iron Mercury Cadmium Chromium Manganese Zinc
State Area ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 35.76 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram 63.45 277.57 NA NA NA 146.27 NA
Assam Digboi 16.87 3 068.25 NA NA NA 808.38 NA
Bihar Dhanbad 31.64 759.60 3.14 NA NA 126.56 NA
Delhi Najafgarh NA 872.70 NA NA 25.5 NA NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb 83.25 NA NA 21.75 NA NA NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano NA 1 084.70 NA 17.88 NA 95.20 NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi 56.88 3 394.00 NA 0.25 NA 557.44 417.82
Kerala Greater Cochin NA 121.40 NA NA NA NA NA
Maharashtra Chembur NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda 406.7 NA NA NA NA 18 360.00 673
Madhya Pradesh Korba NA 3 500.00 NA NA 60 NA NA
Orissa Angul–Talcher NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Punjab Govindgarh 207.2 NA NA 16.4 NA NA NA
Rajasthan Jodhpur NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rajasthan Pali 200 NA NA NA NA NA 400
Tamil Nadu Manali NA 1 629.00 NA NA NA 943.83 NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot NA 150.00 NA NA 330 210.00 NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli NA 2 530.00 NA NA 70 NA NA
West Bengal Durgapur 29.64 349.80 1.97 NA NA 503.94 NA
West Bengal Howrah 79.44 1 166.20 2.921 NA NA 606.74 NA
Accepable limits: lead – 50 g/l; iron – 300 g/l; mercury – 1 g/l; cadmium – 5 g/l; chromium – 100 g/l; manganese – 100 g/l; zinc – 300 g/l;
NA – not available
Source CPCB (1995)
Table 4
Deviation from acceptable limits
Lead Iron Mercury Cadmium Chromium Manganese Zinc
State Area ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l) ( g/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam -14.24 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru-Bolaram 13.46 -22.42 NA NA NA 46.27 NA
Assam Digboi -33.13 2 768.3 NA NA NA 708.38 NA
Bihar Dhanbad -18.36 459.6 2.14 NA NA 26.56 NA
Delhi Najafgarh NA 572.7 NA NA -74.5 NA NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb 33.25 NA NA 16.75 NA NA NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano NA 784.7 NA 12.88 NA -4.80 NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi 6.88 3 094 NA -4.75 NA 457.44 117.82
Kerala Greater Cochin NA -178.6 NA NA NA NA NA
Maharashtra Chembur NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam-Nagda 356.70 NA NA NA NA 18 260.00 373
Madhya Pradesh Korba, NA 3200 NA NA -40 NA NA
Orissa Angul-Talcher NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Punjab Govindgarh 157.20 NA NA 11.4 NA NA NA
Rajasthan Jodhpur NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
Rajasthan Pali 150.00 NA NA NA NA NA 100
Tamil Nadu Manali NA 1 329 NA NA NA 843.83 NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot NA -150 NA NA 230 110.00 NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli NA 2 230 NA NA -30 NA NA
West Bengal Durgapur -20.36 49.8 0.97 NA NA 403.94 NA
West Bengal Howrah 29.44 866.2 1.921 NA NA 506.74 NA
Accepable limits: lead – 50 g/l; iron – 300 g/l; mercury – 1 g/l; cadmium – 5 g/l; chromium – 100 g/l; manganese – 100 g/l; zinc – 300 g/l;
NA – not applicable
Source Compiled by authors
15Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Table 5
Chemical parameters of groundwater from problem areas
Total
dissolved Fluoride Nitrate Chloride Sulphate Boron Phenol Calcium Magnesium Cyanide
State Area solid (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 881.71 1.13 27.66 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram 850.8 0.941429 65.80 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Assam Digboi NA 0.275 .NA NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Bihar Dhanbad NA 0.762 18.56 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Delhi Najafgarh 826.56 1.42 36.70 NA NA 1.44 .NA 70.9 NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA 0.085 NA NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano NA .NA .NA NA NA 1.65 0.056 NA NA .NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi 487 .NA .NA NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Kerala Greater Cochin 320.86 0.22 16.14 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Maharashtra Chembur 953 1.22 .NA NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda 2 599.2 1.6325 .NA 594.3 NA 5.9 .NA 114.64 80.1 0.305
Madhya Pradesh Korba NA 0.4 6.95 NA NA 1.71 .NA NA NA .NA
Orissa Angul–Talcher NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Punjab Govindgarh 669 .NA .NA NA NA .NA 0.0083 300.8 46.6 0.0552
Rajasthan Jodhpur NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Rajasthan Pali 7 065.1 1.18 .NA 3 002.67 689.33 .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Tamil Nadu Manali 4 549 0.39 50.95 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot 11 319 .NA 45.67 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli 327 56.22 .NA NA NA 2.22 0.26 57.2 19.23 .NA
West Bengal Durgapur 425 0.43 9.75 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
West Bengal Howrah 1 261 .NA 9.08 NA NA .NA .NA NA NA .NA
Acceptable limits: total dissolved solid – 500 mg/l; fluoride – 1 mg/l; nitrate – 45 mg/l; chloride – 250 mg/l; sulphate – 250 mg/l; boron – 1 mg/l;
phenol – 0.001–0.002 mg/l; calcium – 75 mg/l; magnesium – 30 mg/l; cyanide – 0.01 mg/l; NA – not available
Source CPCB (1995)
Table 6
Concentration of chemical parameters in groundwater and deviation from acceptable limits
Total
dissolved Fluoride Nitrate Chloride Sulphate Boron Phenol Calcium Magnesium Cyanide
State Area solid (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 381.71 0.13 -17.34 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru-Bolaram 350.80 -0.06 20.80 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA ..NA
Assam Digboi .NA -0.73 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Bihar Dhanbad .NA -0.24 -26.44 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Delhi Najafgarh 326.56 0.42 -8.30 .NA .NA 0.44 .NA -4.1 .NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA 0.083 .NA .NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA 0.65 0.054 .NA .NA .NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi -13.00 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Kerala Greater Cochin -179.14 -0.78 -28.86 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Maharashtra Chembur 453.00 0.22 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam-Nagda 2 099.20 0.63 .NA 344.30 .NA 4.9 .NA 39.64 50.1 0.295
Madhya Pradesh Korba .NA -0.60 -38.05 .NA .NA 0.71 .NA .NA .NA .NA
Orissa Angul-Talcher .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Punjab Govindgarh 169.00 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA 0.0063 225.8 16.6 0.0452
Rajasthan Jodhpur .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Rajasthan Pali 6 565.17 0.18 .NA 2 752.67 439.33 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu Manali 4 049.33 -0.61 5.95 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot 10 819.33 .NA 0.67 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli -173.00 55.22 .NA .NA .NA .1.22 0.258 -17.83 -10.8 .NA
West Bengal Durgapur -75.00 -0.57 -35.25 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
West Bengal Howrah 761.00 .NA -35.92 .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA .NA
Acceptable limits: total dissolved solid – 500 mg/l; fluoride – 1 mg/l; nitrate – 45 mg/l; chloride – 250 mg/l; sulphate – 250 mg/l; boron – 1 mg/l;
phenol – 0.001–0.002 mg/l; calcium – 75 mg/l; magnesium – 30 mg/l; cyanide – 0.01 mg/l; NA – not applicable
Source Compiled by authors
Accounting for freshwater quality in India16
Table 7
Coliform and pesticide concentration in groundwater
Total coliforms
(MPN/100 ml
State Area or TVC*103) Aldrin (ng/l) DDT (ng/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 604.43 .NA .NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram 101.29 430.86 250.14
Assam Digboi 98.5 .NA .NA
Bihar Dhanbad 358.4 284.2 2 840
Delhi Najafgarh 30.31 .NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb .NA 0.054 .NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano .NA .NA .NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi 40.33 .NA 11 600.08
Kerala Greater Cochin 171.29 .NA .NA
Maharashtra Chembur 1 568.91 393 154
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda 535 303.3 2 341.52
Madhya Pradesh Korba 69.11 5.76 415.06
Orissa Angul–Talcher .NA .NA .NA
Punjab Govindgarh .NA .NA .NA
Rajasthan Jodhpur .NA .NA .NA
Rajasthan Pali .NA .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu Manali 14 590.67 .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot 10 997 .NA .NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli 54.84 91.16 217.61
West Bengal Durgapur 970.6 62 4 405.8
West Bengal Howrah 150.2 90 4 800.2
Acceptable limit: total coliforms – <10 MPN (most probable number)/100 ml (or 10 000); aldrin – absent; DDT – absent; NA – not available
Source CPCB (1995)
Table 8
Deviation from acceptable limit
Total coliforms
(MPN/100 ml
State Area or TVC*103) Aldrin (ng/l) DDT (ng/l)
Andhra Pradesh Visakhapatnam 594.43 .NA .NA
Andhra Pradesh Patancheru–Bolaram 91.29 430.86 250.14
Assam Digboi 88.50 .NA .NA
Bihar Dhanbad 348.40* 284.20 2 840.00
Delhi Najafgarh 20.31 .NA .NA
Himachal Pradesh Kala Amb .NA 0.05 .NA
Himachal Pradesh Parwano .NA .NA .NA
Karnataka Bhadravathi 30.33 .NA 11 600.08
Kerala Greater Cochin 161.29 .NA .NA
Maharashtra Chembur 1 558.91 393 154
Madhya Pradesh Ratlam–Nagda 525.00 303.3 2 341.52
Madhya Pradesh Korba 59.11 5.76 415.06
Orissa Angul–Talcher .NA .NA .NA
Punjab Govindgarh .NA .NA .NA
Rajasthan Jodhpur .NA .NA .NA
Rajasthan Pali .NA .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu Manali 14 580.67 .NA .NA
Tamil Nadu North Arcot 10 987.00 .NA .NA
Uttar Pradesh Singrauli 44.84 91.16 217.61
West Bengal Durgapur 960.60* 62.00 4 405.80
West Bengal Howrah 150.20* 90.00 4 800.20
Acceptable limit: total coliforms – <10 MPN (most probable number)/100 ml (or TVC [total variable count]* of 10 000); aldrin – absent; DDT – absent;
NA – not applicable
Source Compiled by authors
17Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Table 9
River length and volume (by state)
Utilizable
Total surface water
River State Length (km) length (km) (km3 /year) Volume (km3)
1 2 3 4 5 3/4*5
Godavari Andhra Pradesh 771 1 465 76.3 40.16
Krishna Andhra Pradesh 386 1 401 58 15.98
Muneru Andhra Pradesh 122 235 13.11 6.81
Manjeera Andhra Pradesh 255 686 13.11 4.87
Musi Andhra Pradesh 112 265 13.11 5.54
Penner Andhra Pradesh 536 597 6.86 6.16
Tungbhadra Andhra Pradesh 375 531 13.11 9.26
Brahmaputra Assam 698 916 24 18.29
Dhansari Assam 100 354 24 6.78
Gandak Bihar 300 630 250 119.05
Ganga Bihar 500 2 525 250 49.50
Ghaghara Bihar 100 1 080 250 23.15
Sone Bihar 226 881 250 64.13
Hasdev Chhattisgarh 233 233 13.11 13.11
Kharoon Chhattisgarh 220 220 13.11 13.11
Mahanadi Chhattisgarh 357 851 49.99 20.97
Seonath Chhattisgarh 383 383 13.11 13.11
Yamuna Delhi 48 1 376 250 8.72
Mandovi Goa 78 78 36.28 36.28
Zuari Goa 56 56 36.28 36.28
Damanganga Gujarat 30 131 14.98 3.43
Khari Gujarat 41 41 14.98 14.98
Mahi Gujarat 242 583 3.1 1.29
Meshwa Gujarat 220 247 14.98 13.34
Narmada Gujarat 178.5 1 312 34.5 4.69
Sabarmati Gujarat 396 444 1.93 1.72
Shedi Gujarat 190 190 14.98 14.98
Tapi Gujarat 214 724 14.5 4.29
Ghaggar Haryana 163 320 46 23.43
Yamuna Haryana 164 1 376 250 29.80
Beas Himachal Pradesh 256 460 46 25.60
Parvati Himachal Pradesh 110 110 46 46.00
Ravi Himachal Pradesh 158 720 46 10.09
Satluj Himachal Pradesh .NA .NA 46 NA
Yamuna Himachal Pradesh 15 1 376 250 2.73
Subarnarekha Jharkhand 269 395 6.81 4.64
Bhadra Karnataka 178 178 13.11 13.11
Bhima Karnataka 860 860 16.73 16.73
Cauvery Karnataka 352 800 19 8.36
Ghat Prabha Karnataka 160 283 16.73 9.46
Kabbani Karnataka 117 240 16.73 8.16
Krishna Karnataka 375 1 401 58 15.52
Mal Prabha Karnataka 230 306 16.73 12.57
Shimsha Karnataka 221 221 16.73 16.73
Tungbhadra Karnataka 156 531 13.11 3.85
Achenkoil Kerala 33 128 16.73 4.31
Bhavani Kerala .NA 216 16.73 0.00
Chaliyar Kerala 169 169 16.73 16.73
Kabbani Kerala 123 240 16.73 8.57
Continued
Accounting for freshwater quality in India18
Utilizable
surface water
River State Length (km) Total length (km) (km3 /year) Volume (km3)
1 2 3 4 5 3/4*5
Manimala Kerala 135 135 16.73 16.73
Pamba Kerala 176 176 16.73 16.73
Periyar Kerala 244 244 16.73 16.73
Betwa Madhya Pradesh 232 590 34.5 13.57
Chambal Madhya Pradesh 184 664 34.5 9.56
Khan Madhya Pradesh .NA .NA 34.5 NA
Kshipra Madhya Pradesh 195 195 34.5 34.50
Mahi Madhya Pradesh 167 583 3.1 0.89
Mandakini Madhya Pradesh .NA .NA .NA NA
Narmada Madhya Pradesh 1 098.5 1 312 34.5 28.89
Sone Madhya Pradesh 655 881 250 185.87
Tapi Madhya Pradesh 255 724 14.5 5.11
Tons Madhya Pradesh 221 284 34.5 26.85
Wainganga Madhya Pradesh 466 609 34.5 26.40
Bhima Maharashtra 725 861 36.28 30.55
Girna Maharashtra 260 260 36.28 36.28
Godavari Maharashtra 694 1 465 76.3 36.14
Krishna Maharashtra 640 1 401 58 26.50
Nira Maharashtra 158 158 36.28 36.28
Patalganga Maharashtra .NA .NA 36.28 NA
Tapi Maharashtra 255 724 14.5 5.11
Ulhas Maharashtra 122 122 36.28 36.28
Wainganga Maharashtra 258 609 36.28 15.37
Wardha Maharashtra 483 483 36.28 36.28
Imphal Manipur .NA .NA .NA NA
Dhamsiri Nagaland .NA 354 24 0.00
Baitarni Orissa 344 355 18.3 17.73
Brahmani Orissa 541 799 18.3 12.39
I.B Orissa 170 251 13.11 8.88
Kuakhai Orissa .NA .NA 13.11 NA
Mahanadi Orissa 494 851 49.99 29.02
Nagavalli Orissa 161 256 13.11 8.24
Rushikulya Orissa 162 162 13.11 13.11
Subarnarekha Orissa 62 395 6.81 1.07
Beas Punjab 214 470 46 20.94
Ghaggar Punjab 102 320 46 14.66
Ravi Punjab 79 720 46 5.05
Satluj Punjab 205 .NA 46 NA
Chambal Rajasthan 382 664 34.5 19.85
Mahi Rajasthan 174 583 3.1 0.93
Testa Sikkim 309 309 24 24.00
Bhavani Tamil Nadu 216 216 16.73 16.73
Cauvery Tamil Nadu 448 800 19 10.64
Tambiraparami Tamil Nadu 130 130 16.73 16.73
Betwa Uttar Pradesh 358 590 34.5 20.93
Chambal Uttar Pradesh 98 664 34.5 5.09
Ganga Uttar Pradesh 1 505 2 525 250 149.01
Ghaghara Uttar Pradesh 470 1 080 250 108.80
Gomti Uttar Pradesh 940 940 250 250.00
Hindon Uttar Pradesh 256 256 250 250.00
Kalinadi Uttar Pradesh .NA .NA .NA NA
Continued
Table 9 Continued
19Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Utilizable
surface water
River State Length (km) Total length (km) (km3 /year) Volume (km3)
1 2 3 4 5 3/4*5
Ramganga Uttar Pradesh 569 940 250 151.33
Rapti Uttar Pradesh 198 198 250 250.00
Rihand Uttar Pradesh 84 224 250 93.75
Sarju Uttar Pradesh 117 150 250 195.00
Yamuna Uttar Pradesh 1 149 1 376 250 208.76
Baraker West Bengal 227 227 250 250.00
Damodar West Bengal 220 437 250 125.86
Ganga West Bengal 520 2 525 250 51.49
Roopnarayan West Bengal 129 129 250 250.00
NA – not available
Source CWC (2004)
not change (this allows comparisons to be made among the states). Initially,this assumption is counter-intuitive because water use is increasing and watershortages are becoming the order of the day. However, it is the fraction of wateravailable for further extraction, which is decreasing (as demand increases)rather than the total available volume each year. Not considering the years inwhich there are droughts, the amount of water theoretically available fromprecipitation and surface water run-off remain on average constant. Of course,there are complicating factors. For example, if an upstream state divertsmore water for use within that state, it can reduce the amount available fordownstream states. It is not possible to adjust the results for this type ofchange in water supply given the limited data available.
Surface water flows into the rivers (as measured by discharge) and isstored in lakes, reservoirs and dams. Groundwater flows can alsocontribute to surface run-off, and in this respect there may be somedouble counting of available water. Data regarding the storage capacity ineach state is available for large and medium-sized projects. Thisinformation has been incorporated, where appropriate, into the table ofstate volumes.
Many state governments detail the surface water resources of the state onofficial websites. This quantity of water is often referred to as total surfacewater. In these cases, the amount of water available in storage has not beenadded to the total volume. Otherwise, the total surface run-off is given andso the storage value is assumed to be in addition to this quantity. Further,surface water data has been taken from independent estimates, for example,from World Bank reports or other NGO (non-governmental organization)sources. Again, if the volume stated is referred to as a total, then the storagevolume for the state in question has not been added to this quantity.
For states where there is no other source of information, simpleapproximations have been made using discharge data for specific rivers. Inmany of the north-eastern states for example, there is information on thecatchment area of each river in the state, the proportion of the catchment
Accounting for freshwater quality in India20
Tab
le 1
0
Wa
ter
qu
ali
ty (
by
rive
r a
nd
sta
te)
19
93
2
00
3
19
93
–20
03
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
9.5
2.2
79
.1 N
A0
.42
27
55
.25
3 1
98
.NA
26
5.5
2.9
3-4
.13
19
8-0
.42
Kris
hn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh3
46
1.8
59
.17
.30
.52
86
41
.96
31
9 6
17
.N
A2
51
80
.11
21
.99
60
9.7
-0.5
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh3
23
1.8
6.7
N
A0
.58
43
62
.45
10
.51
49
.NA
11
30
.65
3.8
14
9-0
.58
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
18
02
.38
.1
NA
0.9
27
36
52
.71
63
2 1
92
.NA
18
50
.47
.93
2 1
92
-0.9
27
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh7
75
7.8
27
.6
NA
4.5
1 4
88
11
.65
94
.28
92
.53
.77
13
3.8
56
6.6
89
2.5
-0.8
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
80
14
.92
4
NA
1.3
77
4.5
2.7
51
5.5
78
10
.93
5-2
6.5
-2.1
5-8
.57
81
-0.3
65
Tun
gbh
ad
raA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh5
95
27
.1
. N
A2
.86
30
2.1
51
3.4
.NA
.NA
35
0.1
56
.30
-2.8
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
51
9.3
58
.46
0.2
32
22
11
3.0
85
71
56
5
.N
A2
07
03
.73
57
1
55
6.5
4-0
.23
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
1.4
12
.49
.22
16
.
NA
17
31
.59
.65
6 4
60
.
NA
17
1.6
-10
.90
.38
56
44
40
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
31
.31
9.6
8.3
31
.81
38
41
.21
91
13
8
.N
A3
81
-0.1
-0.6
1 1
29
.67
-1.8
1
Ga
ng
aB
iha
r4
.25
1.0
21
6.3
27
.87
1.6
83
74
1.6
71
6.1
3 2
08
.
NA
36
9.7
50
.65
-0.2
23
20
0.1
3-1
.68
Gh
agh
ara
Bih
ar
31
.92
26
.22
1.7
34
31
81
.41
9.5
2 0
13
.
NA
31
5-0
.5-2
.52
00
6.7
8-1
.73
4
So
ne
Bih
ar
20
.61
0.8
7.9
51
.75
41
91
1.4
18
.72
63
3
.N
A1
89
0.8
7.9
2 6
25
.05
-1.7
54
Ha
sdev
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
11
5.3
66
.45
4.2
0.9
5
.N
A2
.12
62
90
2-1
1-3
.2-4
0.4
52
85
.81
.05
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
11
.61
9.3
5.7
90
.42
39
1.4
22
.83
70
.24
22
38
-0.2
3.5
31
.21
-0.1
58
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
8.3
3.2
14
4.5
90
.82
20
41
.83
0.3
56
6.3
30
.27
19
5.7
-1.4
16
.35
61
.74
-0.5
5
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
11
.82
7.6
5.8
50
.49
53
10
1.9
52
6.4
33
60
.26
30
90
.15
-1.2
33
0.1
5-0
.23
5
Yam
un
aD
elh
i5
57
2.8
25
.71
1
.N
A6
53
.51
7.8
58
85
79
6 6
68
.5
.N
A9
6.5
15
32
.38
5 7
96
65
7.5
0
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a4
.82
.25
.54
.66
0.1
43
6 5
15
2.8
11
15
5
.N
A3
6 5
10
.20
.65
.51
50
.34
-0.1
4
Zua
riG
oa
4.6
2.6
5.7
4.7
0.1
72
4 3
18
2.3
11
16
3
.N
A2
4 3
13
.4-0
.35
.31
58
.3-0
.17
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t2
21
.41
6.1
40
.30
65
75
52
.85
42
60
.17
10
.55
73
31
.45
25
.95
6.1
71
0.1
94
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t2
11
64
16
1 6
64
1.0
21
.70
92
1 0
82
95
8.8
3 6
62
.41
2 7
83
33
3
.N
A1
8 9
66
54
2.8
1 9
98
.41
2 7
83
33
1.9
8-1
.70
9
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
52
1.9
13
.97
.60
.06
28
11
.14
13
45
.
NA
12
9-0
.76
-0.9
37
.4-0
.06
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
37
2.2
18
.11
1.4
0.5
16
40
21
.98
7 5
08
.
NA
36
5-0
.3-1
0.1
7 4
96
.6-0
.51
6
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t2
93
16
6.7
0.4
52
68
1.2
16
.75
68
.75
.
NA
23
9-1
.80
.75
62
.05
-0.4
5
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
17
34
11
08
11
0.5
31
20
84
02
77
37
5
00
3.3
3
.N
A1
03
5-1
16
93
74
9
92
.33
-0.5
3
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
74
32
4.8
11
.64
0.7
69
1
241
20
.61
01
.37
9 3
95
.
NA
1 1
67
17
.67
6.5
79
3
83
.36
-0.7
69
Tap
iG
uja
rat
33
3.3
22
8.5
0.2
43
37
1.9
33
57
40
.33
04
-1.3
7-1
95
65
.50
.06
Gh
agg
ar
Ha
rya
na
29
29
.63
1.3
40
.48
44
9.3
78
.
NA
.NA
55
2-0
.34
6.7
-4-0
.4
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a3
11
1.3
14
.62
.4
.N
A5
61
.81
0.8
37
.68
44
85
2 7
52
.4
.N
A2
50
.89
.52
3.0
84
4 8
52
75
00
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
des
h1
5.1
0.4
74
.23
.40
.44
20
91
.36
3.7
93
5
.N
A1
93
.90
.89
-0.5
93
1.6
-0.4
4
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
70
.23
3.2
0.1
21
89
0.7
85
92
.
NA
18
20
.55
58
8.8
-0.1
2
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
15
.50
.46
.43
.95
0.2
19
20
.75
2.5
40
.
NA
17
6.5
0.3
5-3
.93
6.0
5-0
.2
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
27
.61
.45
.83
3.5
10
.11
92
62
0.3
77
.71
49
9
.N
A2
34
.4-1
.03
1.8
84
95
.49
-0.1
19
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
NA
NA
NA
N
A
.NA
1 0
45
3.4
42
13
7.5
.
NA
1 0
45
3.4
42
13
7.5
0
Jhel
um
Jam
mu
an
d K
ash
mir
21
5 N
AN
A
NA
2.6
6
.NA
1
.21
81
14
.
NA
-21
51
.21
81
14
-2.6
6
Co
nti
nu
ed
21Accounting for freshwater quality in India
19
93
20
03
19
93
–2
00
3
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
er
Sta
tecm
)(m
g/l)
(mg/
l)1
00
ml)
(mg/
l)cm
)(m
g/l)
(mg/
l)1
00
ml)
(mg/
l)cm
)(m
g/l)
(mg/
l)1
00
ml)
(mg/
l)
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aJh
ark
ha
nd
15
02
.96
.38
.5
.N
A
20
91
.87
31
.75
1 0
42
.
NA
59
-1.0
32
5.4
51
03
3.5
0
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka2
94
.33
86
.70
.26
27
13
.16
.N
A
1 5
52
0.1
92
42
-1.1
4-3
81
54
5.3
-0.0
7
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
taka
81
1.4
45
7.3
0.4
48
71
.62
2.6
66
97
90
.26
40
60
.2-2
2.3
46
97
1.7
-0.1
4
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka2
61
24
.26
7.3
80
.15
25
61
.06
21
.62
18
50
.33
82
30
0.0
6-2
.66
2 1
77.
62
0.1
88
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka3
01
.65
49
.47
.30
.35
25
1.7
57
1.7
1 0
19
.
NA
49
50
.12
2.3
1 0
11
.7-0
.3
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka2
51
.12
76
.8
.N
A
28
71
.12
21
04
60
.19
52
62
0-5
1 0
39
.20
.19
5
Kris
hn
aK
arn
ata
ka4
61
.24
2.3
7.3
0.1
63
17
1.6
52
2.8
2 9
67
0.2
12
71
0.4
5-1
9.5
2 9
59
.70
.05
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
taka
44
1.4
52
7.3
0.4
74
47
1.4
62
7.1
61
40
6
.N
A4
03
0.0
6-2
4.8
41
39
8.7
-0.4
7
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka3
77
31
7.3
80
.15
85
87
1.2
23
2 0
91
0.4
95
55
0-5
.8-8
2 0
83
.62
0.3
37
Tun
gbh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka4
11
.32
3.6
7.3
0.2
91
89
2.6
38
1 5
52
.
NA
14
81
.31
4.4
1 5
44
.7-0
.29
Ach
enko
ilK
era
la5
.50
.57
.57
.21
0.3
86
61
.92
5.6
5 5
50
0.3
56
0.5
1.4
18
.15
54
2.7
9-0
.03
Bh
ava
ni
Ker
ala
11
0.4
6.7
7.7
20
.51
09
0.3
3.2
87
50
.19
98
-0.1
-3.5
86
7.2
8-0
.31
Ch
aliy
ar
Ker
ala
21
00
.45
87
.69
0.3
22
06
90
.45
8.4
1 4
50
.
NA
1 8
59
00
.41
44
2.3
1-0
.32
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la6
0.4
4.7
7
.N
A
81
0.6
3.2
82
50
.15
75
0.2
-1.5
81
80
.15
Ma
nim
ala
Ker
ala
4.5
0.4
6.8
7.6
0.4
75
80
.71
4.4
3 0
62
0.3
48
53
.50
.37
.63
05
4.4
-0.1
22
Pa
mb
aK
era
la5
.50
.78
.17
.30
.33
1 1
171
.12
0.8
14
86
60
.93
1 1
11
.50
.41
2.7
14
85
8.7
0.6
Pe
riya
rK
era
la9
.85
.38
.37
.30
.53
34
1.4
6.4
39
00
.02
32
4.2
-3.9
-1.9
38
2.7
-0.4
8
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.
NA
2
84
2.1
26
92
4
.N
A2
84
2.1
26
92
40
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh1
72
8.5
60
6.0
10
.73
1 0
35
2.7
71
1.9
26
36
19
80
.28
63
-5.7
3-4
8.0
86
36
1
91
.99
-0.5
3
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
81
47
.81
95
.39
.83
.
NA
1
54
63
0
.NA
1
60
0
.N
A1
46
5-1
7.8
-19
5.3
1 5
90
.17
0
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
77
6.8
62
.89
.87
5
.N
A
82
04
.92
0
.NA
.N
A7
43
-1.9
-42
.8-9
.87
50
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.N
A
2.3
30
.34
.91
0.7
1
.NA
.NA
2
54
25
.
NA
0-2
.3-5
.34
20
.09
-0.7
1
Ma
nd
aki
ni
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
32
12
.84
1.3
4.4
60
.23
.N
A
6
.NA
3
45
.
NA
-32
13
.2-4
1.3
34
0.5
4-0
.23
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
10
52
.52
25
.30
.27
21
71
.82
21
.41
79
.N
A
11
2-0
.68
-0.6
17
3.7
-0.2
7
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
32
62
.24
43
.80
.16
19
11
.61
8.7
66
6
.N
A
-13
5-0
.6-2
5.3
66
2.2
-0.1
6
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
27
22
45
.18
0.5
13
21
.26
17
.33
12
6.6
6
.N
A
-95
-0.7
4-6
.67
12
1.4
8-0
.5
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh3
37
2.6
32
4.2
20
.19
.N
A
5.9
5
.NA
4
35
.5
.N
A
-33
73
.35
-32
43
1.2
8-0
.19
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
17
5.2
38
.55
.40
.05
35
3.5
2.2
52
0.5
29
2
.NA
3
36
.5-2
.95
-18
28
6.6
-0.0
5
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
33
5.2
24
.85
4.2
0.5
74
45
16
.18
24
27
80
.36
41
21
0.9
8-0
.85
27
3.8
-0.2
1
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
31
5.1
24
.54
.30
.48
29
56
52
54
.
NA
2
64
0.9
-19
.52
49
.7-0
.48
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
37
.14
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
0.8
64
82
8.0
89
32
78
0.9
54
44
.86
3.2
16
7.8
62
73
.57
0.0
9
Kris
hn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
14
.82
1.4
64
.20
.66
44
86
.33
42
65
0.9
64
27
1.5
12
.54
26
0.8
0.3
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a4
14
.95
64
.40
.57
39
86
.5
.NA
2
28
0.7
46
35
71
.6-5
62
23
.60
.17
6
Pa
talg
an
gaM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
1.5
4.7
52
6.1
4.3
0.3
41
21
5.3
24
21
40
.59
9.5
0.5
5-2
.12
09
.70
.16
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
75
.32
64
.20
.64
67
5.9
4.6
62
31
0.0
65
54
30
0.6
-21
.34
22
6.8
-0.5
34
5
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
24
4.5
52
2.4
4.2
0.4
21
28
5.7
32
21
80
.47
10
41
.15
9.6
21
3.8
0.0
5
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
18
6.8
24
.7
.N
A
0.9
22
74
5.8
32
18
30
.28
32
56
-17
.31
83
-0.6
37
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a6
45
.62
64
.43
1.9
63
77
5.2
.N
A
17
30
.95
31
3-0
.4-2
61
68
.57
-1.0
1
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
r3
1.5
2.2
4.6
5.9
20
.12
10
32
.4
.NA
6
0
.N
A
71
.50
.2-4
.65
4.0
8-0
.12
Dh
am
siri
Na
gala
nd
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.
NA
2
26
4.3
8
.NA
.NA
.N
A
22
64
.38
00
0 Co
nti
nu
ed
Accounting for freshwater quality in India22
19
93
20
03
19
93
–2
00
3
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Ba
ita
rni
Oris
sa2
6.8
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
.N
A
5 6
42
1.6
6
.NA
4
43
70
.08
5 6
15
.2-2
.7-2
2.5
64
43
1.0
80
.08
Bra
hm
an
iO
rissa
30
.93
.54
14
.45
6.2
5
.NA
1
60
17
4.2
3 3
99
1.4
11
29
.11
3.4
6-1
0.2
53
39
2.7
51
.41
I.B
Oris
sa3
34
.92
3.4
5.5
.N
A
14
71
.55
.N
A
3 5
39
.N
A
11
4-3
.35
-23
.43
53
3.5
0
Ku
akh
ai
Oris
sa2
63
.61
4.6
6.1
5
.NA
1
80
2.2
5
.NA
4
77
9
.NA
1
54
-1.3
5-1
4.6
4 7
72
.85
0
Ma
ha
na
di
Oris
sa2
74
.11
95
.8
.NA
4
58
5.5
1.8
62
45
70
6
.NA
4
55
8.5
-2.2
45
5 7
00
.20
Na
gava
lliO
rissa
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
43
12
.25
.N
A
7 4
80
0.4
04
43
12
.25
07
48
00
.40
4
Ru
shik
uly
aO
rissa
77
.51
7.8
75
3.2
4
.NA
9
20
61
.8
.NA
5
15
00
.65
9 1
28
.5-1
6-7
55
14
6.7
60
.65
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aO
rissa
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
.N
A
27
41
.72
33
0
.NA
0
.34
27
41
.72
33
00
0.3
4
Be
an
Pu
nja
b1
7.4
16
.74
.51
.52
27
72
.06
6.2
27
83
.N
A
27
6-5
.34
-10
.48
77
8.5
-1.5
2
Gh
agg
ar
Pu
nja
b1
20
39
4
.NA
4
74
32
94
3 6
58
.N
A
47
31
25
53
65
40
Ra
viP
un
jab
.N
A
0.8
1.9
30
.66
54
93
12
.82
52
94
4
.NA
4
93
12
23
.12
94
1-0
.66
5
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
4.4
4.4
37
.43
.85
1.2
38
74
.52
12
.58
5 0
76
.N
A
38
2.6
0.0
95
.18
5
07
2.1
5-1
.2
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
12
.43
86
.73
0.4
83
14
.67
1.6
38
.17
73
70
.13
31
3.6
7-0
.77
-29
.83
73
0.2
7-0
.35
Ma
hi
Ra
jast
ha
n
.NA
2
.43
9.4
7.2
20
.35
95
10
1.7
8.1
91
4
.NA
5
10
-0.7
-31
.39
06
.78
-0.3
59
Test
aS
ikki
m
.NA
.NA
.N
A
.NA
.NA
2
78
8.5
5
.NA
1
99
.N
A
27
88
.55
01
99
0
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u3
31
5.2
74
3.5
11
.10
.52
33
1.6
13
.81
24
3
.NA
2
00
-13
.67
-29
.71
23
1.9
-0.5
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
57
2.5
81
6.3
81
0.5
0.5
2 8
23
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
.N
A
2 7
66
-0.4
53
6.9
21
07
2.5
-0.5
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
3
33
1.8
21
.72
51
0.2
43
33
1.8
21
.72
51
0.2
4
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh3
92
.21
7.7
12
.26
0.5
42
84
2.1
27
1 1
00
.N
A
24
5-0
.19
.31
0
87.
74
-0.5
4
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
41
62
.81
5.3
10
.85
48
2.2
11
.92
54
2 5
83
.N
A
13
2-0
.6-3
.42
54
2 5
82
-0.8
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
12
2.6
11
58
.92
0.4
25
72
.91
17
.05
21
33
00
.84
62
45
0.3
2.0
52
1 3
21
.08
0.4
46
Gh
agh
ara
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh3
13
.28
.18
.43
0.8
35
11
.32
1.0
51
12
0
.NA
3
20
-1.9
12
.95
1 1
11
.57
-0.8
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh5
45
.03
19
.76
9.5
20
.42
.N
A
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
1-5
4-2
.53
-4.2
61
8
78
8.4
80
.58
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
12
95
81
35
8.2
.N
A
95
62
9.8
66
17
63
33
5 6
53
.66
.32
82
7-2
8.1
34
41
3 3
35
64
5.4
6.3
2
Kal
ind
iU
tta
r P
rad
esh
39
3.9
27
.21
2.2
6
.NA
7
03
34
.92
21
91
63
30
5 5
62
17
.66
66
43
1.0
21
91
.81
63
30
5 5
49
17
.66
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh4
63
.92
5.7
9.5
3
.NA
4
46
4.7
.N
A
11
24
4
.NA
4
00
0.8
-25
.71
1 2
34
.47
0
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh3
23
7.3
.N
A
0.7
34
08
2.2
22
.81
28
.N
A
37
6-0
.81
5.5
12
8-0
.73
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
.N
A
2.3
13
8.3
0.0
05
22
3.5
24
22
45
40
.00
72
23
.5-0
.32
92
44
5.7
0.0
02
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
3
31
3.3
16
69
75
.N
A
33
13
.31
66
97
50
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
76
76
.62
1.3
57
.98
2.4
57
66
6.6
22
9.1
24
0 8
26
49
40
.36
-10
.02
7.7
74
0 8
26
48
6-2
.09
Ba
rake
rW
est
Be
nga
l1
59
4.8
23
.3
.N
A
.NA
.NA
1
.2
.NA
7
0 0
00
.N
A
-15
9-3
.6-2
3.3
70
00
00
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
nga
l2
02
52
.42
35
.61
1.3
90
.01
89
11
.83
16
.42
52
1
79
.60
.13
8-1
13
4-0
.59
-19
.22
52
1
68
.21
0.1
28
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
nga
l5
38
11
6.7
51
1.2
0.2
24
70
2.4
32
4.4
23
40
33
70
.18
-68
1.4
37
.67
34
0
32
5.8
-0.0
4
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
nga
l1
78
91
.11
8.2
11
.39
0.1
66
23
81
.6
.NA
2
38
3 3
35
.N
A
-1 5
51
0.5
-18
.22
38
3 3
23
.6-0
.16
6
BO
D –
bio
chem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d;
CO
D –
ch
emic
al o
xyge
n d
ema
nd
; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er;
NA
– n
ot
ap
plic
ab
le
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
Tab
le
10
Continued
23Accounting for freshwater quality in India
area that falls within the state, and the river discharge. This information canbe used to approximate river discharge by state. This estimate is ideal but inthe absence of relevant data, it provides a rough approximation of surfaceflow in the state. For the remaining states, a similar method has beenemployed by using the length of the river in each state as compared to thetotal length and total discharge. Again, this method is severely limited but isuseful for a general approximation. In both of these cases, water storagecapacity has been considered in addition.
The information provided on water volume by state can only beconsidered as a guideline to the amount of water available. Unfortunately,the data does not represent the volume at any particular point in time asthe data has been taken from different sources for a number of years.
In Table 9, the total length of all the major rivers in India, length of theserivers by state, and utilizable surface water in these rivers are recorded.The proportionate length of river in each state has been multiplied byutilizable surface water in that river to approximate the total volume ofwater in each river in each state.
The quality of surface water is under threat from industrial,agricultural, and domestic waste, and these contaminants are oftenconcentrated in water bodies by overextraction. Additional problemsare caused when these pollutants interact with each other or decomposeto produce toxic by-products.
New pollutants are frequently introduced into the environment byindustrial and domestic activities. These pollutants are not only directlydetrimental to human health when consumed in drinking water but alsoseverely affect aquatic ecosystems and the services they provide. Qualityissues are compounded when overextraction leads to a reduction in theavailable water for diluting waste discharge.
Contaminants can be classified into different categories includingorganic, inorganic, biological, and thermal. It would clearly be unfeasibleto monitor every compound that is discharged into water supplies;instead a number of indicator criteria are used. As the water qualityaccounts must be comparable throughout the country, only the limitednumber of criteria used in every state can be included in this study. Thedata needs to be consistent not only spatially but also temporally, furtherconstraining the number of parameters available for use.
The general quality indicators used in this report are total coliforms,BOD, COD, and conductivity. Unfortunately, other essential qualitymeasures such as nitrate levels have only been measured for 2003 andcannot be included in the survey of surface water. Appendices 1–5 givedetails of the polluted stretches of the rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and tanks indifferent states of India.
Quality of surface
water
Accounting for freshwater quality in India24
One of the most pressing concerns for India in particular is the highlevel of bacteria in water, which are the cause of many water-bornediseases. These pollutant levels can be monitored by measuring the loadof coliforms in the water. The coliforms themselves do not cause diseasebut serve as indicators for pathogens that are detrimental to health.These organisms find their way into water from untreated sewage andanimal effluent. An acceptable level is 200 colonies per 100 ml, but manyIndian water courses far exceed this level. This water, if used for bathingand drinking, can lead to serious illness. There are two methods forassessing the levels of disease-causing bacteria: TVC (total variablecount) and MPN (most probable number) methods. Whilst most statesuse MPN, some have quoted the levels using the TVC method, whichmakes it difficult to compare data sets.
The level of organic pollution is also very high. The organic matter isprocessed by bacteria that consume oxygen while breaking down thismaterial. This reduces the dissolved oxygen content of the water, leadingto near–anoxic conditions that are poisonous for fish populations andother aquatic organisms. The concentration of organic matter can beassessed by measuring the BOD of the water. Water with a BOD levelabove 3 mg/l is considered polluted and above 6 mg/l as heavily polluted.Some stretches of the Yamuna river in Delhi have a BOD as high as58 mg/l. The overall oxygen demand from substances in water can befound by considering at the COD. This measures the demand fromevery component of the water, which requires oxygen fordecomposition. COD is, therefore, always higher than BOD but doesnot differentiate between biological and inorganic contaminants. Itgives a broader indication of the total pollutant load, which BOD alonefails to do. A comparison of BOD and COD can give clues on othercompounds in water. For example, very high COD but low BOD cansuggest the presence of chemicals that are toxic to bacterial populationand may merit further investigation. Finally, the conductivity of thewater is measured. This is essentially a measurement of the TDS (TotalDissolved Solids) of the water.
The data on pollutants, especially with regard to conductivity, BOD,COD, total coliforms, and N, for different rivers flowing through thestates, has been compared over the period 1993–2003. The data onpollutants has been generated from water samples collected by the CPCB.Different rivers have been considered for the same state. Changes inquality of water, using the suggested parameters, show a decline in thequality of water over the decade. Details are provided in Table 10.
Table 10 shows the actual levels of five parameters of water quality (byriver and by state), namely, conductivity, BOD, COD, total coliforms,
Computation of
change in the
quality of surface
water during
1993–2003
25Accounting for freshwater quality in India
and nitrates. Changes in these parameters of water quality are recordedfrom 1993 to 2003 for which data is available. Positive values showdeterioration in water quality while negative values show improvement.While conductivity and total coliform levels in the water have worsened,BOD and COD levels have shown improvement in some cases. Overalltrends point to a sharp fall in the quality of water over the period1993–2003.
The use of water in the country has been considered for three dominantpurposes: irrigation, drinking, and industry. Water used for each purposehas an acceptable limit usually provided by the CPCB. For 1993, thedeviation of pollutants from the acceptable levels and correspondingvolume of water have been estimated for each state. The same exercise hasbeen repeated for different uses for 1993 and 2003. Details are given inTables 11–13.
Likewise, the deviation from the acceptable limit for irrigation has beencomputed for 2003 (Appendix 6).
The quality standards set for drinking water are, as perhaps one wouldexpect, higher than the water used for irrigation and industry. Our resultsshow that the rate of change of deviation between the measured value andthe acceptable limit over the period 1993–2003 has increased acrossdifferent states, which indicates a decline in water quality. This decline isprimarily driven by human activities of various types. Table 11 providesthe details of deviation from acceptable limit of drinking water in 1993.Over 1993–2003, the deviations have been given (by river) but they havebeen aggregated for the states (Appendix 7). In order to aggregate thedata by state, the total length of all the major rivers in India, length ofthese rivers by state, and utilizable surface water in these rivers arerecorded. The proportionate length of river in each state has beenmultiplied by utilizable surface water in that river to get the total volumeof water in each river, in each state.
Appendix 8 gives data on the deviation from the acceptable quality limitsfor water for irrigation purposes over the period 1993–2003 andAppendix 9 gives the data collated by state (by river) for the change ofwater quality from acceptable limits between 1993 and 2003.
Accounting for freshwater quality in India26
Tab
le 1
1
De
via
tio
n o
f q
ua
lity
(fo
r w
ate
r u
sed
fo
r d
rin
kin
g p
urp
ose
s) f
rom
th
e a
cce
pta
ble
lim
its
in 1
99
3
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
9.5
2.2
79
.1.N
A0
.42
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
0.5
2.2
79
.10
-44
.58
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h1
5.9
83
46
1.8
59
.17.
30
.52
00
00
00
45
-1 6
54
1.8
59
.17.
3-4
4.5
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h6
.81
32
31
.86
.7.N
A0
.58
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
67
71
.86
.70
-44
.42
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
71
80
2.3
8.1
.NA
0.9
27
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
82
02
.38
.10
-44
.07
3
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h5
.54
77
57.
82
7.6
.NA
4.5
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
22
57.
82
7.6
0-4
0.5
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
68
01
4.9
24
.NA
1.3
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
19
94
.92
40
-43
.7
Tun
gbh
ad
raA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h9
.26
59
52
7.1
.NA
2.8
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
40
52
7.1
0-4
2.2
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
91
51
9.3
58
.46
0.2
32
00
00
00
45
-1 9
85
19
.35
8.4
6-4
4.7
7
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
81
.41
2.4
9.2
21
6.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
98
.61
2.4
9.2
21
6-4
5.0
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
53
1.3
19
.68
.33
1.8
12
00
00
00
45
-1 9
97
1.3
19
.68
.33
-43
.19
Ga
nga
Bih
ar
49
.50
4.2
51
.02
16
.32
7.8
71
.68
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
5.7
51
.02
16
.32
7.8
7-4
3.3
2
Gh
agh
ara
Bih
ar
23
.15
31
.92
26
.22
1.7
34
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
71
.92
26
.22
-43
.26
6
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
20
.61
0.8
7.9
51
.75
42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
98
0.6
10
.87.
95
-43
.24
6
Ha
sde
vC
hh
att
isga
rh1
3.1
11
15
.36
6.4
54
.20
.95
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
98
95
.36
6.4
54
.2-4
4.0
5
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
11
.61
9.3
5.7
90
.42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
99
1.6
19
.35
.79
-44
.6
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
att
ish
garh
20
.97
8.3
3.2
14
4.5
90
.82
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
1.7
3.2
14
4.5
9-4
4.1
8
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
11
.82
7.6
5.8
50
.49
52
00
00
00
45
-1 9
99
1.8
27.
65
.85
-44
.50
5
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
55
72
.82
5.7
11
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
44
32
.82
5.7
11
-45
.0
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
84
.82
.25
.54
.66
0.1
42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
95
.22
.25
.54
.66
-44
.86
Zua
riG
oa
36
.28
4.6
2.6
5.7
4.7
0.1
72
00
00
00
45
-1 9
95
.42
.65
.74
.7-4
4.8
3
Da
ma
nga
nga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
22
1.4
16
.14
0.3
06
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
81
.41
6.1
4-4
4.6
94
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
82
11
641
61
66
41
.02
1.7
09
2 0
00
00
04
51
16
416
16
64
1.0
2-4
3.2
91
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
15
21
.91
3.9
7.6
0.0
62
00
00
00
45
-1 8
48
1.9
13
.97.
6-4
4.9
4
Mes
hw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
37
2.2
18
.11
1.4
0.5
16
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
32
.21
8.1
11
.4-4
4.4
84
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
29
31
66
.70
.45
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
971
31
66
.7-4
4.5
5
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
217
341
10
81
10
.53
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
82
741
10
81
1-4
4.4
7
Sh
edi
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
874
32
4.8
11
.64
0.7
69
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
92
63
24
.81
1.6
4-4
4.2
31
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
93
33
.32
28
.50
.24
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
73
.32
28
.5-4
4.7
6
Gh
agg
ar
Ha
rya
na
23
.43
29
29
.63
1.3
40
.42
00
00
00
45
-1 7
08
9.6
31
.34
-44
.6
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
03
11
1.3
14
.62
.4.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 6
89
1.3
14
.62
.4-4
5.0
Bea
nH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h2
5.6
01
5.1
0.4
74
.23
.40
.44
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
98
4.9
0.4
74
.23
.4-4
4.5
6
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h4
6.0
07
0.2
33
.20
.12
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
30
.23
3.2
-44
.88
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h1
0.0
91
5.5
0.4
6.4
3.9
50
.22
00
00
00
45
-1 9
84
.50
.46
.43
.95
-44
.8
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h.N
A2
7.6
1.4
5.8
33
.51
0.1
19
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
2.4
1.4
5.8
33
.51
-44
.88
1
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h2
.73
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
00
00
-45
.0
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aJh
ark
ha
nd
4.6
41
50
2.9
6.3
8.5
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
85
02
.96
.38
.5-4
5.0
Co
nti
nu
ed
27Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka1
3.1
12
94
.33
86
.70
.26
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
14
.33
86
.7-4
4.7
4
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
taka
16
.73
81
1.4
45
7.3
0.4
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
91
91
.44
57
.3-4
4.6
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka8
.36
26
12
4.2
67
.38
0.1
52
00
00
00
45
-1 9
741
24
.26
7.3
8-4
4.8
5
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka9
.46
30
1.6
54
9.4
7.3
0.3
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
01
.65
49
.47
.3-4
4.7
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka8
.16
25
1.1
27
6.8
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
51
.12
76
.8-4
5.0
Kris
hn
aK
arn
ata
ka1
5.5
24
61
.24
2.3
7.3
0.1
62
00
00
00
45
-1 9
54
1.2
42
.37
.3-4
4.8
4
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
taka
12
.57
44
1.4
52
7.3
0.4
72
00
00
00
45
-1 9
56
1.4
52
7.3
-44
.53
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka1
6.7
33
77
31
7.3
80
.15
82
00
00
00
45
-1 9
63
73
17
.38
-44
.84
2
Tun
gbh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka3
.85
41
1.3
23
.67
.30
.29
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
95
91
.32
3.6
7.3
-44
.71
Ach
enko
ilK
era
la4
.31
5.5
0.5
7.5
7.2
10
.38
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
4.5
0.5
7.5
7.2
1-4
4.6
2
Bh
ava
ni
Ker
ala
01
10
.46
.77
.72
0.5
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
98
90
.46
.77
.72
-44
.5
Ch
aliy
ar
Ker
ala
16
.73
21
00
.45
87
.69
0.3
22
00
00
00
45
-1 7
90
0.4
58
7.6
9-4
4.6
8
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
60
.44
.77
.0.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
94
0.4
4.7
7.0
-45
.0
Ma
nim
ala
Ker
ala
16
.73
4.5
0.4
6.8
7.6
0.4
72
00
00
00
45
-1 9
95
.50
.46
.87
.6-4
4.5
3
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
35
.50
.78
.17
.30
.33
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
4.5
0.7
8.1
7.3
-44
.67
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
39
.85
.38
.37
.30
.52
00
00
00
45
-1 9
90
.25
.38
.37
.3-4
4.5
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
00
00
-45
.0
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
17
28
.56
06
.01
0.7
32
00
00
00
45
-1 8
28
8.5
60
6.0
1-4
4.2
7
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.NA
81
47
.81
95
.39
.83
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
91
94
7.8
19
5.3
9.8
3-4
5.0
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.57
76
.86
2.8
9.8
75
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
92
36
.86
2.8
9.8
75
-45
.0
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
9.N
A2
.33
0.3
4.9
10
.71
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
02
.33
0.3
4.9
1-4
4.2
9
Ma
nd
aki
ni
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.NA
32
12
.84
1.3
4.4
60
.23
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
67
92
.84
1.3
4.4
6-4
4.7
7
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
10
52
.52
25
.30
.27
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
89
52
.52
25
.3-4
4.7
3
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
73
26
2.2
44
3.8
0.1
62
00
00
00
45
-1 6
742
.24
43
.8-4
4.8
4
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
22
72
24
5.1
80
.52
00
00
00
45
-1 7
73
22
45
.18
-44
.5
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
53
37
2.6
32
4.2
20
.19
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
66
32
.63
24
.22
-44
.81
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.41
75
.23
8.5
5.4
0.0
52
00
00
00
45
-1 9
83
5.2
38
.55
.4-4
4.9
5
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
33
5.2
24
.85
4.2
0.5
72
00
00
00
45
-1 9
67
5.2
24
.85
4.2
-44
.43
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
31
5.1
24
.54
.30
.48
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
95
.12
4.5
4.3
-44
.52
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
37
.14
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
0.8
62
00
00
00
45
-1 9
62
.86
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
-44
.14
Kris
hn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
21
4.8
21
.46
4.2
0.6
62
00
00
00
45
-1 9
79
4.8
21
.46
4.2
-44
.34
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
84
14
.95
64
.40
.57
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
95
94
.95
64
.4-4
4.4
3
Pa
talg
an
gaM
ah
ara
shtr
a.N
A2
1.5
4.7
52
6.1
4.3
0.3
42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
78
.54
.75
26
.14
.3-4
4.6
6
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
37
5.3
26
4.2
0.6
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
35
.32
64
.2-4
4.4
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
24
4.5
52
2.4
4.2
0.4
22
00
00
00
45
-1 9
76
4.5
52
2.4
4.2
-44
.58
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
18
6.8
24
.7.N
A0
.92
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
98
26
.82
4.7
0-4
4.0
8
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
86
45
.62
64
.43
1.9
62
00
00
00
45
-1 9
36
5.6
26
4.4
3-4
3.0
4
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
r.N
A3
1.5
2.2
4.6
5.9
20
.12
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
8.5
2.2
4.6
5.9
2-4
4.8
8
Dh
am
siri
Na
gala
nd
0.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
–2 0
00
00
0–
45
.0
Co
nti
nu
ed
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India28
Ba
ita
rni
Oris
sa1
7.7
32
6.8
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
97
3.2
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
-45
Bra
hm
an
iO
rissa
12
.39
30
.93
.54
14
.45
6.2
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
69
.13
.54
14
.45
6.2
5-4
5
I.B
Oris
sa8
.88
33
4.9
23
.45
.5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
67
4.9
23
.45
.5-4
5
Ku
akh
ai
Oris
saN
A2
63
.61
4.6
6.1
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
743
.61
4.6
6.1
5-4
5
Ma
ha
na
di
Oris
sa2
9.0
22
74
.11
95
.8.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
73
4.1
19
5.8
-45
Na
gava
lliO
rissa
8.2
4.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
00
0-4
5
Ru
shik
uly
aO
rissa
13
.11
77
.51
7.8
75
3.2
4.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
22
.51
7.8
75
3.2
4-4
5
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aO
rissa
1.0
7.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
00
0-4
5
Be
an
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
41
7.4
16
.74
.51
.52
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
97
.41
6.7
4.5
-43
.48
Gh
agg
ar
Pu
nja
b1
4.6
61
20
39
4.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
99
20
39
4-4
5
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
5.N
A0
.81
.93
0.6
65
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
00
.81
.93
-44
.33
5
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
4.4
4.4
37
.43
.85
1.2
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
99
5.6
4.4
37
.43
.85
-43
.8
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
12
.43
86
.73
0.4
82
00
00
00
45
-1 9
99
2.4
38
6.7
3-4
4.5
2
Ma
hi
Ra
jast
ha
n0
.93
.NA
2.4
39
.47
.22
0.3
59
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
02
.43
9.4
7.2
2-4
4.6
41
Test
aS
ikki
m2
4.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
00
0-4
5
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
33
31
5.2
74
3.5
11
.10
.52
00
00
00
45
-1 9
67
15
.27
43
.51
1.1
-44
.5
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
57
2.5
81
6.3
81
0.5
0.5
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
94
32
.58
16
.38
10
.5-4
4.5
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
3.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
00
0-4
5
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
33
92
.21
7.7
12
.26
0.5
42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
61
2.2
17
.71
2.2
6-4
4.4
6
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
94
16
2.8
15
.31
0.8
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
58
42
.81
5.3
1-4
4.2
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
11
22
.61
15
8.9
20
.42
00
00
00
45
-1 9
88
2.6
11
58
.92
-44
.6
Gh
agh
ara
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
08
.83
13
.28
.18
.43
0.8
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
93
.28
.18
.43
-44
.2
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
54
5.0
31
9.7
69
.52
0.4
22
00
00
00
45
-1 9
46
5.0
31
9.7
69
.52
-44
.58
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
01
29
58
13
58
.2.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 8
71
58
13
58
.2-4
5
Kal
ind
iU
tta
r P
rad
esh
NA
39
3.9
27
.21
2.2
6.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 9
61
3.9
27
.21
2.2
6-4
5
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
46
3.9
25
.79
.53
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
95
43
.92
5.7
9.5
3-4
5
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
32
37
.3.N
A0
.73
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
96
83
7.3
0-4
4.2
7
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
.NA
2.3
13
8.3
0.0
05
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
02
.31
38
.3-4
4.9
95
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
00
00
-45
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
67
67
6.6
21
.35
7.9
82
.45
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
23
36
.62
1.3
57
.98
-42
.55
Ba
rake
rW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
15
94
.82
3.3
.NA
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
84
14
.82
3.3
0-4
5
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
nga
l1
25
.86
20
25
2.4
23
5.6
11
.39
0.0
12
00
00
00
45
25
2.4
23
5.6
11
.39
-44
.99
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
nga
l5
1.4
95
38
11
6.7
51
1.2
0.2
22
00
00
00
45
-1 4
62
11
6.7
51
1.2
-44
.78
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
17
89
1.1
18
.21
1.3
90
.16
62
00
00
00
45
-21
11
.11
8.2
11
.39
-44
.83
4
BO
D –
bio
chem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d;
CO
D –
ch
emic
al o
xyge
n d
ema
nd
; N
A –
no
t a
vaila
ble
; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er;
NA
– n
ot
ava
ilab
le
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
A
ccep
tab
le w
ate
r q
ua
lity
A
ccep
tab
le li
mit
D
iffer
ence
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Tab
le
11
Continued
29Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Tab
le 1
2
De
via
tio
n o
f a
ctu
al
qu
ali
ty (
of
wa
ter
use
d f
or
dri
nki
ng
pu
rpo
ses)
fro
m t
he
acc
ep
tab
le l
imit
in
20
03
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
y
A
ccep
tab
le li
mit
D
iffer
ence
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uc
tivi
tyco
lifo
rms
Vo
lum
e(
mh
os/
BO
DC
OD
(MP
N/
Nit
rate
s(
mh
os/
BO
DC
OD
(MP
N/
Nit
rate
s(
mh
os/
BO
DC
OD
(MP
N/
Nit
rate
s
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
27
55
.25
3 1
98
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
72
55
.25
3 1
98
-45
Kris
hn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh1
5.9
82
86
41
.96
31
9 6
17.N
A2
00
00
00
45
86
41
.96
31
9 6
17-4
5
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh6
.81
43
62
.45
10
.51
49
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
56
42
.45
10
.51
49
-45
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
73
65
2.7
16
32
19
2.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 6
35
2.7
16
32
19
2-4
5
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh5
.54
1 4
88
11
.65
94
.28
92
.53
.72
00
00
00
45
-51
21
1.6
59
4.2
89
2.5
-41
.3
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
67
74
.52
.75
15
.57
81
0.9
35
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
22
5.5
2.7
51
5.5
78
1-4
4.0
65
Tun
gbh
ad
raA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh9
.26
63
02
.15
13
.4.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 3
70
2.1
51
3.4
0-4
5
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
92
22
11
3.0
85
71
56
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
78
11
3.0
85
71
56
5-4
5
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
81
73
1.5
9.6
56
4
60
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
82
71
.59
.65
6 4
60
-45
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
53
84
1.2
19
1 1
38
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
61
61
.21
91
13
8-4
5
Ga
ng
aB
iha
r4
9.5
03
74
1.6
71
6.1
3 2
08
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
62
61
.67
16
.13
20
8-4
5
Gh
agh
ara
Bih
ar
23
.15
31
81
.41
9.5
2 0
13
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
68
21
.41
9.5
2 0
13
-45
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
19
11
.41
8.7
2 6
33
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
80
91
.41
8.7
2 6
33
-45
Ha
sdev
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
.NA
2.1
26
29
02
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
02
.12
62
90
-43
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
23
91
.42
2.8
37
0.2
42
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
76
11
.42
2.8
37
-44
.75
8
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
20
.97
20
41
.83
0.3
56
6.3
30
.27
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
79
61
.83
0.3
56
6.3
3-4
4.7
3
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
31
01
.95
26
.43
36
0.2
62
00
00
00
45
-1 6
90
1.9
52
6.4
33
6-4
4.7
4
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
65
3.5
17
.85
88
5 7
96
66
8.5
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
34
6.5
17
.85
88
5 7
96
66
9-4
5
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
83
6 5
15
2.8
11
15
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
34
51
52
.81
11
55
-45
Zua
riG
oa
36
.28
24
31
82
.31
11
63
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
52
2 3
18
2.3
11
16
3-4
5
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
5 7
55
2.8
54
26
0.1
71
0.5
2 0
00
00
04
53
75
52
.85
42
60
.17
-34
.5
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
82
1 0
82
95
8.8
3 6
62
.41
2 7
83
33
3.N
A2
00
00
00
45
19
08
29
58
.83
66
2.4
12
78
3 3
33
-45
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
28
11
.14
13
45
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
71
91
.14
13
45
-45
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
40
21
.98
7 5
08
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
59
81
.98
75
08
-45
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
26
81
.21
6.7
56
8.7
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
32
1.2
16
.75
68
.75
-45
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
21
20
84
02
77
37
5
00
3.3
3.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-79
24
02
77
37
5 0
03
.3-4
5
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
1 2
41
20
.61
01
.37
9 3
95
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-7
59
20
.61
01
.37
9 3
95
-45
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
93
37
1.9
33
57
40
.32
00
00
00
45
-1 6
63
1.9
33
57
4-4
4.7
Gh
agg
ar
Ha
rya
na
23
.43
84
49
.37
8.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 1
56
9.3
78
0-4
5
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
05
61
.81
0.8
37
.68
44
85
2 7
52
.4.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 4
38
.21
0.8
37
.68
44
85
2 7
52
-45
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
des
h2
5.6
02
09
1.3
63
.79
35
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
79
11
.36
3.7
93
5-4
5
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
46
.00
18
90
.78
59
2.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 8
11
0.7
85
92
-45
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
10
.09
19
20
.75
2.5
40
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
80
80
.75
2.5
40
-45
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
.NA
26
20
.37
7.7
14
99
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
73
80
.37
7.7
14
99
-45
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
2.7
31
04
53
.44
21
37
.5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-95
53
.44
21
37
.5-4
5
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aJh
ark
ha
nd
4.6
42
09
1.8
73
1.7
51
04
2.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
91
1.8
73
1.7
51
04
2-4
5
Co
nti
nu
ed
Accounting for freshwater quality in India30
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka1
3.1
12
71
3.1
6.N
A1
55
20
.19
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
72
93
.16
01
55
2-4
4.8
1
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
taka
16
.73
48
71
.62
2.6
66
97
90
.26
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
51
31
.62
2.6
66
97
9-4
4.7
4
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka8
.36
25
61
.06
21
.62
18
50
.33
82
00
00
00
45
-1 7
44
1.0
62
1.6
2 1
85
-44
.66
2
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka9
.46
52
51
.75
71
.71
01
9.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 4
75
1.7
57
1.7
1 0
19
-45
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka8
.16
28
71
.12
21
04
60
.19
52
00
00
00
45
-1 7
13
1.1
22
1 0
46
-44
.80
5
Kris
hn
aK
arn
ata
ka1
5.5
23
17
1.6
52
2.8
2 9
67
0.2
12
00
00
00
45
-1 6
83
1.6
52
2.8
2 9
67
-44
.79
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
taka
12
.57
44
71
.46
27
.16
1 4
06
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
55
31
.46
27
.16
1 4
06
-45
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka1
6.7
35
87
1.2
23
2 0
91
0.4
95
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
41
31
.22
32
09
1-4
4.5
05
Tun
gbh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka3
.85
18
92
.63
81
55
2.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 8
11
2.6
38
1 5
52
-45
Ach
enko
ilK
era
la4
.31
66
1.9
25
.65
55
00
.35
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
93
41
.92
5.6
5 5
50
-44
.65
Bh
ava
ni
Ker
ala
01
09
0.3
3.2
87
50
.19
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
89
10
.33
.28
75
-44
.81
Ch
aliy
ar
Ker
ala
16
.73
2 0
69
0.4
58
.41
45
0.N
A2
00
00
00
45
69
0.4
58
.41
45
0-4
5
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
81
0.6
3.2
82
50
.15
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
91
90
.63
.28
25
-44
.85
Ma
nim
ala
Ker
ala
16
.73
58
0.7
14
.43
06
20
.34
82
00
00
00
45
-1 9
42
0.7
14
.43
06
2-4
4.6
52
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
31
117
1.1
20
.81
4 8
66
0.9
32
00
00
00
45
-88
31
.12
0.8
14
86
6-4
4.0
7
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
33
34
1.4
6.4
39
00
.02
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
66
61
.46
.43
90
-44
.98
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
28
42
.12
69
24
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
71
62
.12
69
24
-45
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
1 0
35
2.7
71
1.9
26
36
19
80
.22
00
00
00
45
-96
52
.77
11
.92
63
6 1
98
-44
.8
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
1 5
46
30
.NA
1 6
00
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-4
54
30
01
60
0-4
5
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.58
20
4.9
20
.NA
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
18
04
.92
00
-45
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
9.N
A.N
A2
54
25
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
00
25
42
5-4
5
Ma
nd
aki
ni
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
.NA
6.N
A3
45
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
06
03
45
-45
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
21
71
.82
21
.41
79
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
78
31
.82
21
.41
79
-45
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
71
91
1.6
18
.76
66
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
80
91
.61
8.7
66
6-4
5
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
13
21
.26
17
.33
12
6.6
6.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 8
68
1.2
61
7.3
31
26
.66
-45
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
5.N
A5
.95
.NA
43
5.5
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-2
00
05
.95
04
35
.5-4
5
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.43
53
.52
.25
20
.52
92
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
64
6.5
2.2
52
0.5
29
2-4
5
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
44
51
6.1
82
42
78
0.3
62
00
00
00
45
-1 5
55
16
.18
24
27
8-4
4.6
4
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
29
56
52
54
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
70
56
52
54
-45
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
48
28
.08
93
27
80
.95
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
51
88
.08
93
27
8-4
4.0
5
Kris
hn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
44
86
.33
42
65
0.9
62
00
00
00
45
-1 5
52
6.3
34
26
5-4
4.0
4
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
83
98
6.5
.NA
22
80
.74
62
00
00
00
45
-1 6
02
6.5
02
28
-44
.25
4
Pa
talg
an
gaM
ah
ara
shtr
aN
A1
21
5.3
24
21
40
.52
00
00
00
45
-1 8
79
5.3
24
21
4-4
4.5
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
46
75
.94
.66
23
10
.06
55
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
53
35
.94
.66
23
1-4
4.9
34
5
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
12
85
.73
22
18
0.4
72
00
00
00
45
-1 8
72
5.7
32
21
8-4
4.5
3
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
27
45
.83
21
83
0.2
83
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
72
65
.83
21
83
-44
.71
7
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
83
77
5.2
.NA
17
30
.95
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
62
35
.20
17
3-4
4.0
5
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
rN
A1
03
2.4
.NA
60
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
89
72
.40
60
-45
Dh
am
siri
Na
gala
nd
02
26
4.3
8.N
A.N
A.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
744
.38
00
-45
Co
nti
nu
ed
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Tab
le
12
Continued
31Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ba
ita
rni
Oris
sa1
7.7
35
64
21
.66
.NA
4 4
37
0.0
82
00
00
00
45
3 6
42
1.6
60
4 4
37
-44
.92
Bra
hm
an
iO
rissa
12
.39
16
01
74
.23
39
91
.41
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
84
01
74
.23
39
9-4
3.5
9
I.B
Oris
sa8
.88
14
71
.55
.NA
3 5
39
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
85
31
.55
03
53
9-4
5
Ku
akh
ai
Oris
saN
A1
80
2.2
5.N
A4
77
9.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 8
20
2.2
50
4 7
79
-45
Ma
ha
na
di
Oris
sa2
9.0
24
58
5.5
1.8
62
45
70
6.N
A2
00
00
00
45
2 5
85
.51
.86
24
5 7
06
-45
Na
gava
lliO
rissa
8.2
44
31
2.2
5.N
A7
48
00
.40
42
00
00
00
45
-1 5
69
2.2
50
7 4
80
-44
.59
6
Ru
shik
uly
aO
rissa
13
.11
92
06
1.8
.NA
5 1
50
0.6
52
00
00
00
45
7 2
06
1.8
05
15
0-4
4.3
5
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aO
rissa
1.0
72
74
1.7
23
30
.NA
0.3
42
00
00
00
45
-1 7
26
1.7
2 3
30
0-4
4.6
6
Be
an
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
42
77
2.0
66
.22
78
3.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
23
2.0
66
.22
78
3-4
5
Gh
agg
ar
Pu
nja
b1
4.6
64
73
12
55
3 6
54
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
52
71
25
53
65
4-4
5
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
54
93
12
.82
52
94
4.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 5
07
12
.82
52
94
4-4
5
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
38
74
.52
12
.58
5 0
76
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
61
34
.52
12
.58
5 0
76
-45
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
31
4.6
71
.63
8.1
77
37
0.1
32
00
00
00
45
-1 6
85
.33
1.6
38
.17
73
7-4
4.8
7
Ma
hi
Ra
jast
ha
n0
.93
51
01
.78
.19
14
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
49
01
.78
.19
14
-45
Test
aS
ikki
m2
42
78
8.5
5.N
A1
99
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
72
28
.55
01
99
-45
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
32
33
1.6
13
.81
24
3.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 7
67
1.6
13
.81
24
3-4
5
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
28
23
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
58
23
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
-45
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
33
33
1.8
21
.72
51
0.2
42
00
00
00
45
-1 6
67
1.8
21
.72
51
-44
.76
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
32
84
2.1
27
1 1
00
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
71
62
.12
71
10
0-4
5
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
95
48
2.2
11
.92
54
2 5
83
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
45
22
.21
1.9
2 5
42
58
3-4
5
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
12
57
2.9
11
7.0
52
1 3
30
0.8
46
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
74
32
.91
17
.05
21
33
0-4
4.1
54
Gh
agh
ara
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
08
.83
51
1.3
21
.05
1 1
20
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
64
91
.32
1.0
51
12
0-4
5
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.NA
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
12
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
-44
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
09
56
29
.86
61
76
3 3
35
65
3.6
6.3
22
00
00
00
45
-1 0
44
29
.86
61
76
3 3
35
65
4-3
8.6
8
Kal
ind
iU
tta
r P
rad
esh
NA
70
33
4.9
22
19
163
30
5 5
62
17
.66
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
29
73
4.9
22
19
1.6
3-2
7.3
4
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
44
64
.7.N
A1
1 2
44
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
55
44
.70
11
24
4-4
5
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
40
82
.22
2.8
12
8.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 5
92
2.2
22
.81
28
-45
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
22
3.5
24
22
45
40
.00
72
00
00
00
45
-1 7
76
.52
42
2 4
54
-44
.99
3
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
33
13
.31
66
97
5.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-1 6
69
3.3
16
6 9
75
-45
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
67
66
6.6
22
9.1
24
0 8
26
49
40
.36
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
23
46
.62
29
.12
40
82
6 4
94
-44
.64
Ba
rake
rW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
.NA
1.2
.NA
70
00
0.N
A2
00
00
00
45
-2 0
00
1.2
07
0 0
00
-45
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
nga
l1
25
.86
89
11
.83
16
.42
52
1
79
.60
.13
82
00
00
00
45
-1 1
09
1.8
31
6.4
25
2
17
9.6
-44
.86
2
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
nga
l5
1.4
94
70
2.4
32
4.4
23
40
33
70
.18
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
53
02
.43
24
.42
34
0 3
37
-44
.82
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
23
81
.6.N
A2
38
3 3
35
.NA
2 0
00
00
04
5-1
76
21
.60
2 3
83
33
5-4
5
NA
– n
ot
ava
ilab
le;
BO
D –
bio
chem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d;
CO
D –
ch
emic
al o
xyge
n d
ema
nd
; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er;
NA
– n
ot
ava
ilab
le
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India32
Tab
le 1
3
De
via
tio
n o
f a
ctu
al
qu
ali
ty (
of
wa
ter
for
irri
ga
tio
n u
se)
fro
m t
he
acc
ep
tab
le l
imit
in
19
93
A
ccep
tab
le w
ate
r q
ua
lity
A
ccep
tab
le li
mit
D
iffer
ence
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
9.5
2.2
79
.1.N
A0
.42
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
40
.5-9
7.7
3-2
40
.9-1
00
0N
A
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h1
5.9
83
46
1.8
59
.17.
30
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
90
4-9
8.1
5-2
40
.9-9
92
.7N
A
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h6
.81
32
31
.86
.7.N
A0
.58
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
27
-98
.2-2
43
.3-1
00
0N
A
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
71
80
2.3
8.1
.NA
0.9
27
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
70
-97.
7-2
41.9
-1 0
00
NA
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h5
.54
77
57.
82
7.6
.NA
4.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 4
75
-92
.2-2
22
.4-1
00
0N
A
Pen
ner
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
68
01
4.9
24
.NA
1.3
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 4
49
-95
.1-2
26
-1 0
00
NA
Tun
gbh
ad
raA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h9
.26
59
52
7.1
.NA
2.8
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 6
55
-98
-24
2.9
-1 0
00
NA
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
91
51
9.3
58
.46
0.2
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
23
5-9
9-2
40
.65
-99
1.5
4N
A
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
81
.41
2.4
9.2
21
6.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
8.6
-87.
6-2
40
.78
-98
4N
A
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
53
1.3
19
.68
.33
1.8
12
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
7-9
8.7
-23
0.4
-99
1.6
7N
A
Ga
nga
Bih
ar
49
.50
4.2
51
.02
16
.32
7.8
71
.68
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
45
.75
-98
.98
-23
3.6
8-9
92
.13
NA
Gh
agh
ara
Bih
ar
23
.15
31
.92
26
.22
1.7
34
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
47
-98
.1-2
28
-99
3.7
8N
A
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
20
.61
0.8
7.9
51
.75
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
8-9
9.4
-23
9.2
-99
2.0
5N
A
Ha
sdev
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
11
5.3
66
.45
4.2
0.9
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
23
9-9
4.7
-18
3.5
5-9
95
.8N
A
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
11
.61
9.3
5.7
90
.42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
9-9
8.4
-23
0.7
-99
4.2
1N
A
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
20
.97
8.3
3.2
14
4.5
90
.82
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
41
.7-9
6.8
-23
6-9
95
.41
NA
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
11
.82
7.6
5.8
50
.49
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
9-9
8.2
-22
2.4
-99
4.1
5N
A
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
55
72
.82
5.7
11
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 6
93
-97
.2-2
24
.3-9
89
NA
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
84
.82
.25
.54
.66
0.1
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
5.2
-97
.8-2
44
.5-9
95
.34
NA
Zua
riG
oa
36
.28
4.6
2.6
5.7
4.7
0.1
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
5.4
-97
.4-2
44
.3-9
95
.3N
A
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
22
1.4
16
.14
0.3
06
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
28
-98
.6-2
33
.9-9
96
NA
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
82
11
64
16
1 6
64
1.0
21
.70
92
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
34
31
61
41
4-9
98
.98
NA
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
15
21
.91
3.9
7.6
0.0
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
09
8-9
8.1
-23
6.1
-99
2.4
NA
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
37
2.2
18
.11
1.4
0.5
16
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
13
-97
.8-2
31
.9-9
88
.6N
A
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
29
31
66
.70
.45
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
21
-97
-23
4-9
93
.3N
A
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
21
73
41
10
81
10
.53
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
77
-59
-14
2-9
89
NA
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
74
32
4.8
11
.64
0.7
69
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
76
-97
-22
5.2
-98
8.3
6N
A
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
93
33
.32
28
.50
.24
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
17-9
6.7
-22
8-9
91
.5N
A
Gh
agg
ar
Ha
rya
na
23
.43
29
29
.63
1.3
40
.42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
95
8-9
0.4
-21
8.7
-99
6N
A
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
03
11
1.3
14
.62
.4.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
93
9-9
8.7
-23
5.4
-99
7.6
NA
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
des
h2
5.6
01
5.1
0.4
74
.23
.40
.44
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
34
.9-9
9.5
3-2
45
.8-9
96
.6N
A
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
46
.00
70
.23
3.2
0.1
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
3-9
9.8
-24
7-9
96
.8N
A
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
10
.09
15
.50
.46
.43
.95
0.2
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
34
.5-9
9.6
-24
3.6
-99
6.0
5N
A
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
.NA
27
.61
.45
.83
3.5
10
.11
92
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
2.4
-98
.6-2
44
.17
-99
6.4
9N
A
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
2.7
3.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aJh
ark
ha
nd
4.6
41
50
2.9
6.3
8.5
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
00
-97
.1-2
43
.7-9
91
.5N
A
Co
nti
nu
ed
33Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka1
3.1
12
94
.33
86
.70
.26
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
21
-95
.7-2
12
-99
3.3
NA
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
taka
16
.73
81
1.4
45
7.3
0.4
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
69
-98
.6-2
05
-99
2.7
NA
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka8
.36
26
12
4.2
67
.38
0.1
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
4-9
9-2
25
.74
-99
2.6
2N
A
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka9
.46
30
1.6
54
9.4
7.3
0.3
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
20
-98
.35
-20
0.6
-99
2.7
NA
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka8
.16
25
1.1
27
6.8
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
25
-98
.9-2
23
-99
3.2
NA
Kris
hn
aK
arn
ata
ka1
5.5
24
61
.24
2.3
7.3
0.1
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
20
4-9
8.8
-20
7.7
-99
2.7
NA
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
taka
12
.57
44
1.4
52
7.3
0.4
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
20
6-9
8.6
-19
8-9
92
.7N
A
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka1
6.7
33
77
31
7.3
80
.15
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
3-9
3-2
19
-99
2.6
2N
A
Tun
gbh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka3
.85
41
1.3
23
.67
.30
.29
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
09
-98
.7-2
26
.4-9
92
.7N
A
Ach
enko
ilK
era
la4
.31
5.5
0.5
7.5
7.2
10
.38
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
44
.5-9
9.5
-24
2.5
-99
2.7
9N
A
Bh
ava
ni
Ker
ala
0.0
01
10
.46
.77
.72
0.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
39
-99
.6-2
43
.3-9
92
.28
NA
Ch
aliy
ar
Ker
ala
16
.73
21
00
.45
87
.69
0.3
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
04
0-9
9.5
5-2
42
-99
2.3
1N
A
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
60
.44
.77
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
44
-99
.6-2
45
.3-9
93
NA
Ma
nim
ala
Ker
ala
16
.73
4.5
0.4
6.8
7.6
0.4
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
5.5
-99
.6-2
43
.2-9
92
.4N
A
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
35
.50
.78
.17
.30
.33
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
44
.5-9
9.3
-24
1.9
-99
2.7
NA
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
39
.85
.38
.37
.30
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
0.2
-94
.7-2
41
.7-9
92
.7N
A
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-10
0-2
50
-1 0
00
NA
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
17
28
.56
06
.01
0.7
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
07
8-9
1.5
-19
0-9
93
.99
NA
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.NA
81
47
.81
95
.39
.83
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
69
-52
.2-5
4.7
-99
0.1
7N
A
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.50
77
6.8
62
.89
.87
5.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
17
3-9
3.2
-18
7.2
-99
0.1
25
NA
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
9.N
A2
.33
0.3
4.9
10
.71
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-97
.7-2
19
.7-9
95
.09
NA
Ma
nd
aki
ni
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
.NA
32
12
.84
1.3
4.4
60
.23
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
29
-97
.2-2
08
.7-9
95
.54
NA
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
10
52
.52
25
.30
.27
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
45
-97
.5-2
28
-99
4.7
NA
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
73
26
2.2
44
3.8
0.1
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
92
4-9
7.8
-20
6-9
96
.2N
A
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
22
72
24
5.1
80
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
02
3-9
8-2
26
-99
4.8
2N
A
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
53
37
2.6
32
4.2
20
.19
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
13
-97
.4-2
18
-99
5.7
8N
A
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.40
17
5.2
38
.55
.40
.05
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
33
-94
.8-2
11
.5-9
94
.6N
A
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
33
5.2
24
.85
4.2
0.5
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
217
-94
.8-2
25
.15
-99
5.8
NA
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
31
5.1
24
.54
.30
.48
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
19
-94
.9-2
25
.5-9
95
.7N
A
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
37
.14
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
0.8
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
2.8
6-9
5.1
3-2
24
.86
-99
5.5
7N
A
Kris
hn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
02
14
.82
1.4
64
.20
.66
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
29
-95
.2-2
28
.54
-99
5.8
NA
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
84
14
.95
64
.40
.57
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
09
-95
.1-1
94
-99
5.6
NA
Pa
talg
an
gaM
ah
ara
shtr
a.N
A2
1.5
4.7
52
6.1
4.3
0.3
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
8.5
-95
.25
-22
3.9
-99
5.7
NA
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
37
5.3
26
4.2
0.6
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
13
-94
.7-2
24
-99
5.8
NA
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
24
4.5
52
2.4
4.2
0.4
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
6-9
5.4
5-2
27
.6-9
95
.8N
A
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
18
6.8
24
.7.N
A0
.92
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
32
-93
.2-2
25
.3-1
00
0N
A
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
86
45
.62
64
.43
1.9
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
18
6-9
4.4
-22
4-9
95
.57
NA
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
r.N
A3
1.5
2.2
4.6
5.9
20
.12
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
18
.5-9
7.8
-24
5.4
-99
4.0
8N
A
Dh
am
siri
Na
gala
nd
0.0
0.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Ba
ita
rni
Oris
sa1
7.7
32
6.8
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
23
.2-9
5.6
4-2
27
.44
-99
4.0
8N
A
Co
nti
nu
ed
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India34
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter
qu
alit
yA
ccep
tab
le li
mit
Diff
ere
nce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Bra
hm
an
iO
rissa
12
.39
30
.93
.54
14
.45
6.2
5.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
9.1
-96
.46
-23
5.5
5-9
93
.75
NA
I.B
Oris
sa8
.88
33
4.9
23
.45
.5.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
217
-95
.1-2
26
.6-9
94
.5N
A
Ku
akh
ai
Oris
sa.N
A2
63
.61
4.6
6.1
5.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
4-9
6.4
-23
5.4
-99
3.8
5N
A
Ma
ha
na
di
Oris
sa2
9.0
22
74
.11
95
.8.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
22
3-9
5.9
-23
1-9
94
.2N
A
Na
gava
lliO
rissa
8.2
4.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Ru
shik
uly
aO
rissa
13
.11
77
.51
7.8
75
3.2
4.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
17
2.5
-82
.2-1
75
-99
6.7
6N
A
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aO
rissa
1.0
7.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Be
an
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
41
7.4
16
.74
.51
.52
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
49
-92
.6-2
33
.3-9
95
.5N
A
Gh
agg
ar
Pu
nja
b1
4.6
61
.02
0.0
39
.04
.0.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
9-8
0-2
11
-99
6N
A
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
5.N
A0
.81
.93
0.6
65
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-99
.2-2
48
.1-9
97
NA
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
.NA
4.4
4.4
37
.43
.85
1.2
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
45
.6-9
5.5
7-2
42
.6-9
96
.15
NA
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
12
.43
86
.73
0.4
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
24
9-9
7.6
-21
2-9
93
.27
NA
Ma
hi
Ra
jast
ha
n0
.93
.NA
2.4
39
.47
.22
0.3
59
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-97
.6-2
10
.6-9
92
.78
NA
Test
aS
ikki
m2
4.0
0.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
33
31
5.2
74
3.5
11
.10
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
217
-84
.73
-20
6.5
-98
8.9
NA
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
57
2.5
81
6.3
81
0.5
0.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
93
-97
.42
-23
3.6
2-9
89
.5N
A
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
3.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
0N
A
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
33
92
.21
7.7
12
.26
0.5
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
1-9
7.8
-23
2.3
-98
7.7
4N
A
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
94
16
2.8
15
.31
0.8
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
34
-97
.2-2
34
.7-9
99
NA
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
11
22
.61
15
8.9
20
.42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
23
8-9
7.3
9-2
35
-99
1.0
8N
A
Gh
agh
ara
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
08
.80
31
3.2
8.1
8.4
30
.82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
9-9
6.8
-24
1.9
-99
1.5
7N
A
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
54
5.0
31
9.7
69
.52
0.4
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
19
6-9
4.9
7-2
30
.24
-99
0.4
8N
A
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
0.0
01
29
58
13
58
.2.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
12
1-4
2-1
15
-99
1.8
NA
Kal
ind
iU
tta
r P
rad
esh
.NA
39
3.9
27
.21
2.2
6.N
A2
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
21
1-9
6.1
-22
2.8
-98
7.7
4N
A
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
46
3.9
25
.79
.53
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
04
-96
.1-2
24
.3-9
90
.47
NA
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
32
37
.3.N
A0
.73
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
18
-97
-24
2.7
-1 0
00
NA
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
.NA
2.3
13
8.3
0.0
05
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-97
.7-2
37
-99
1.7
NA
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
.00
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-10
0-2
50
-1 0
00
NA
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
67
67
6.6
21
.35
7.9
82
.45
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 4
83
-93
.4-2
28
.65
-99
2.0
2N
A
Ba
rake
rW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
.00
15
94
.82
3.3
.NA
.NA
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
91
-95
.2-2
26
.7-1
00
0N
A
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
nga
l1
25
.86
20
25
2.4
23
5.6
11
.39
0.0
12
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
-97
.58
-21
4.4
-98
8.6
1N
A
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
nga
l5
1.4
95
38
11
6.7
51
1.2
0.2
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
71
2-9
9-2
33
.25
-98
8.8
NA
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
nga
l2
50
.00
17
89
1.1
18
.21
1.3
90
.16
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-4
61
-98
.9-2
31
.8-9
88
.61
NA
BO
D –
bio
chem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d;
CO
D –
ch
emic
al o
xyge
n d
ema
nd
; N
A –
no
t a
vaila
ble
; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er;
NA
– n
ot
ava
ilab
le
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
Tab
le
13
Continued
35Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Estimation of
economic value of
quality loss (cost
of treatment)
Most of the studies accounting for freshwater resources take physicalvalues of quantity and quality change. However, there are few caseswherein successful attempts have been made to capture the monetaryvalue of the loss.
Methodology Any value of water resources would entail identification of the eventualuse of water for drinking, irrigation, industry, recreation, hydropowergeneration, and so on. Many of the uses of water do not impact upon theoverall quantity of available water; examples include hydropowergeneration and recreation. However, they do have an impact on the qualityof water. Ideally, biophysical data on various impacts of water are availablein the scientific domain, but they are not amenable to economic valuation.The impact of water pollution on human health, ecosystem functioning,and biodiversity is known with great certainty but it is difficult to carry outits accounting and valuation as the relationships involved are non-linearand marked by the presence of thresholds and unimaginable synergy. Theyalso change much more capriciously than the accounting entity.
In this monograph, the replacement cost method has been used. Thismethod works on the assumption that society needs to incur resource(costs) to bring back the ecological attributes of the natural resourcesfrom the polluted state to the non-polluted state (acceptable level)prescribed by the CPCB. Here, the method also assumes that the socialpreference/willingness to spend the resource would be equal toindividual’s willingness to do so. The imputed degradation in the qualityof water is sought to be reverted to the acceptable level. The treatmentcosts incurred in bringing the volume of polluted water back to theacceptable level for each state of India have been estimated at the unit ratederived from the representative sample plants in Noida and Ghaziabad.
Environmental costs resulting from economic activity, to which this principlecannot be applied, may be distinguished by costs caused and costs borne.Costs caused refer to the costs associated with the immediate effect of theeconomic activity on the environment at a specific place during a specificperiod. The costs borne refer to the costs associated with the direct andindirect effects of environmental degradation, regardless of the question ofwhich economic activities have caused environmental degradation and when.Both the methods centre around health-related data, which is poorlymaintained in India. Environmental costs can also be divided into input costsand actual costs, depending on whether costs are actually incurred (UNSD1993). In this monograph, we have adopted the replacement cost approachwhere in the pollution caused during 1993–2003, over and above theaccepted level of various pollutants, is supposed to be treated to bring it backto the original level of 1993. Needless to say, those standards would bedifferent for different uses.
The volume of polluted water has been divided into three categories, drinking,irrigation, and industry, as each of them has different values of acceptable
Accounting for freshwater quality in India36
pollution limit. The usual national ratio of water going into irrigation,household, and industry is 8:1:1. So for each state, deviation from theacceptable limit and the corresponding water volume have been estimated.Subsequently, the volume of polluted water is supposed to be treated for eachpollutant. But most of the technology comes in a package wherein all pollutantsare treated simultaneously. The range in treatment technologies is also large.For the same treatment of BOD, COD, and other heavy metals, the costs oftreatment vary between Rs 0.64 per cubic metre to Rs 1.98 per cubic metre.This figure has been derived from the average size of the treatment plants. Ithas been assumed that the cost of pollution is invariant with the intensity ofpollutants and size of the treatment plant. This is on the basis of theinformation provided by the CPCB from their representative plants inGhaziabad and Noida (Appendix 10). It is assumed that the polluted water fordifferent purposes in different quantities is to be treated. The question is thenwhat would be the cost of the treatment that an economy would need to incur.Tables 14 and 15 provide the necessary computation and figures.
Since the prevailing technologies give a range of values, both the ranges –higher and lower – have been obtained to arrive at the average figure ofexpenditure that would be needed to bring the polluted water back to theacceptable level.
To bring the water to the standards of drinking water, the calculation ofcosts was significant. For irrigation purpose, the treatment was either
Table 14
Cost of treatment of pollutants in surface water (by state)
Lower range Upper range Average
Total volume treatment expenditure treatment expenditure treatment expenditure
State (million m3) (2*0.64) (Rs million) (2*1.99) (Rs million) (Rs million)
1 2 3 4 5
Andhra Pradesh 82 620 52 876.80 164 413.80 135 083.70
Assam 25 070 16 044.80 49 889.30 40 989.45
Bihar 255 830 163 731.20 509 101.70 418 282.05
Chhattisgarh 47 190 30 201.60 93 908.10 77 155.65
Delhi 8 720 5 580.80 17 352.80 14 257.20
Goa 72 560 46 438.40 144 394.40 118 635.60
Gujarat 53 140 34 009.60 105 748.60 86 883.90
Haryana 29 800 19 072.00 59 302.00 48 723.00
Himachal Pradesh 84 420 54 028.80 167 995.80 138 026.70
Jharkhand 4 640 2 969.60 9 233.60 7 586.40
Karnataka 104 490 66 873.60 207 935.10 170 841.15
Kerala 63 070 40 364.80 125 509.30 103 119.45
Madhya Pradesh 49 980 31 987.20 99 460.20 81 717.30
Maharashtra 222 510 142 406.40 442 794.90 363 803.85
Manipur 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Nagaland 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Orissa 90 440 57 881.60 179 975.60 147 869.40
Punjab 19 710 12 614.40 39 222.90 32 225.85
Rajasthan 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sikkim 24 000 15 360.00 47 760.00 39 240.00
Tamil Nadu 44 100 28 224.00 87 759.00 72 103.50
Uttar Pradesh 1 682 670 1 076 908.80 3 348 513.30 2 751 165.45
West Bengal 677 350 433 504.00 1 347 926.50 1 107 467.25
Total 2 428 120 1 553 996.80 4 831 958.80 3 969 976.20
Source Compiled by authors
37Accounting for freshwater quality in India
unavailable or not required at the national level. For industry uses, thedata was not available. Therefore, while calculating the total cost oftreatment, only water for drinking purposes is considered.
The costs of treating water for irrigation could not be estimated, asstandards are not well defined. Some pollutants could prove beneficial toagriculture, such as N (nitrogen), P (phosphorus), and K (potassium),which act as fertilizer, and so on. Same is the case with water for industrialuses. Much depends upon the type of industry and the processes forwhich water is being used. Coolants of thermal power plant can useconsiderably polluted water without much of problem while the food–processing industry would require water that conforms to drinking waterstandards. The necessary information required to incorporate this into thepresent model was either unavailable or questionable. Hence, it was leftunaccounted. This also suggests that the cost of water pollution estimatedthrough the replacement cost approach is conservative at the most.
Appendix 10 provides the calculation of cost of damages with respect toquality of surface water and Appendix 11 shows the efficacy of the plantsfrom where the cost data has been derived. The input and output qualityshows that the plant is quite effective in treating the polluted water. Incase of groundwater, there is only one data set and the deviation inpollution from the acceptable limit has been attributed to humanactivities (assumption). For surface water, the costs have been computedfor the decline in quality for the period 1993–2003. By assuming a lineartrend in the cost of treatment over the period 1993–2003, the averageannual cost for surface water degradation has been computed in Table 16,and the cost of groundwater degradation is computed in Table 17.
Table 18 describes the lower and higher values of replacement costs ofsurface water and groundwater and Table 19 shows a summary of average
Table 15
Cost of groundwater treatment
Volume in Lower range Upper range Average
study area treatment expenditure treatment expenditure treatment expenditure
State (million m3) (2*0.64) (Rs million) (2*1.99) (Rs million) (Rs million)
1 2 3 4 5
Andhra Pradesh 20.97 13.4208 41.7303 34.28595
Assam 1 194.43 764.4352 2 376.9157 1 952.89305
Bihar 1 027 657.28 2 043.73 1 679.145
Delhi 162.7 104.128 323.773 266.0145
Himachal Pradesh 31.64 20.2496 62.9636 51.7314
Karnataka 3.52 2.2528 7.0048 5.7552
Kerala 38.01 NA NA NA
Maharashtra 2.46 1.5744 4.8954 4.0221
Madhya Pradesh 850.19 544.1216 1 691.8781 1 390.06065
Orissa 322.57 206.4448 641.9143 527.40195
Punjab 2.61 1.6704 5.1939 4.26735
Rajasthan 116.17 74.3488 231.1783 189.93795
Tamil Nadu 2 790.01 1 785.6064 5 552.1199 4 561.66635
Uttar Pradesh 1 494.68 956.5952 2 974.4132 2 443.8018
West Bengal 423.55 271.072 842.8645 692.50425
NA – not available
Source Compiled by authors
Accounting for freshwater quality in India38
Tab
le 1
6
Est
ima
tes
of
eco
no
mic
co
st o
f tr
ea
tme
nt
of
de
gra
de
d s
urf
ace
wa
ter
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
To
tal t
rea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
for
dri
nk
ing
pu
rpo
se
for
irri
ga
tio
n p
urp
os
ein
in
du
stry
Low
er ra
nge
Up
per
ran
geLo
wer
ran
geU
pp
er ra
nge
Low
er ra
nge
Up
per
ran
geLo
wer
ran
geU
pp
er ra
nge
(3*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(3*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(3*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(3*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
Sta
te(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)
12
34
56
78
91
01
11
21
3
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
52
87
6.8
01
64
41
3.8
01
35
08
3.7
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A5
2 8
76
.80
16
4 4
13
.80
13
5 0
83
.70
Ass
am
16
04
4.8
04
9 8
89
.30
40
98
9.4
5N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
6 0
44
.80
49
88
9.3
04
0 9
89
.45
Bih
ar
16
3 7
31
.20
50
9 1
01
.70
41
8 2
82
.05
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
16
3 7
31
.20
50
9 1
01
.70
41
8 2
82
.05
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh3
0 2
01
.60
93
90
8.1
07
7 1
55
.65
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
30
20
1.6
09
3 9
08
.10
77
15
5.6
5
De
lhi
5 5
80
.80
17
35
2.8
01
4 2
57
.20
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
5 5
80
.80
17
35
2.8
01
4 2
57
.20
Go
a4
6 4
38
.40
14
4 3
94
.40
11
8 6
35
.60
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
46
43
8.4
01
44
39
4.4
01
18
63
5.6
0
Gu
jara
t3
4 0
09
.60
10
5 7
48
.60
86
88
3.9
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A3
4 0
09
.60
10
5 7
48
.60
86
88
3.9
0
Ha
rya
na
19
07
2.0
05
9 3
02
.00
48
72
3.0
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
9 0
72
.00
59
30
2.0
04
8 7
23
.00
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh5
4 0
28
.80
16
7 9
95
.80
13
8 0
26
.70
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
54
02
8.8
01
67
99
5.8
01
38
02
6.7
0
Jha
rkh
an
d2
96
9.6
09
23
3.6
07
58
6.4
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A2
96
9.6
09
23
3.6
07
58
6.4
0
Ka
rna
tak
a6
6 8
73
.60
20
7 9
35
.10
17
0 8
41
.15
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
66
87
3.6
02
07
93
5.1
01
70
84
1.1
5
Ke
rala
40
36
4.8
01
25
50
9.3
01
03
11
9.4
5N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A4
0 3
64
.80
12
5 5
09
.30
10
3 1
19
.45
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
31
98
7.2
09
9 4
60
.20
81
71
7.3
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A3
1 9
87
.20
99
46
0.2
08
1 7
17
.30
Ma
ha
rash
tra
14
2 4
06
.40
44
2 7
94
.90
36
3 8
03
.85
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
14
2 4
06
.40
44
2 7
94
.90
36
3 8
03
.85
Ma
nip
ur
0.0
00
.00
0.0
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A0
.00
0.0
00
.00
Na
ga
lan
d0
.00
0.0
00
.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
00
.00
0.0
0
Ori
ssa
57
88
1.6
01
79
97
5.6
01
47
86
9.4
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A5
7 8
81
.60
17
9 9
75
.60
14
7 8
69
.40
Pu
nja
b1
2 6
14
.40
39
22
2.9
03
2 2
25
.85
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12
61
4.4
03
9 2
22
.90
32
22
5.8
5
Ra
jas
tha
n0
.00
0.0
00
.00
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.0
00
.00
0.0
0
Sik
kim
15
36
0.0
04
7 7
60
.00
39
24
0.0
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
5 3
60
.00
47
76
0.0
03
9 2
40
.00
Tam
il N
ad
u2
8 2
24
.00
87
75
9.0
07
2 1
03
.50
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
28
22
4.0
08
7 7
59
.00
72
10
3.5
0
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
07
6 9
08
.80
3 3
48
51
3.3
02
75
1 1
65
.45
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1 0
76
90
8.8
03
34
8 5
13
.30
2 7
51
16
5.4
5
We
st B
en
ga
l4
33
50
4.0
01
34
7 9
26
.50
1 1
07
46
7.2
5N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A4
33
50
4.0
01
34
7 9
26
.50
1 1
07
46
7.2
5
NA
– n
ot
ava
ila
ble
So
urc
eC
om
pil
ed
by
au
tho
rs
39Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Tab
le 1
7
Gro
un
dw
ate
r d
eg
rad
ati
on
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
To
tal t
rea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
for
dri
nk
ing
pu
rpo
se
for
irri
ga
tio
n p
urp
os
ein
in
du
stry
Low
er r
an
geU
pp
er r
an
geLo
wer
ra
nge
Up
per
ra
nge
Low
er r
an
geU
pp
er r
an
geLo
wer
ra
nge
Up
per
ra
nge
(*0
.64
)(3
*1
.99
)A
vera
ge(*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(*0
.64
)(*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(*0
.64
)(3
*1
.99
)A
vera
ge
Sta
te(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
13
.42
41
.73
34
.29
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
13
.42
41
.73
34
.29
Ass
am
76
4.4
42
37
6.9
21
95
2.8
9N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A7
64
.44
2 3
76
.92
1 9
52
.89
Bih
ar
65
7.2
82
04
3.7
31
67
9.1
5N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A6
57
.28
2 0
43
.73
1 6
79
.15
De
lhi
10
4.1
33
23
.77
26
6.0
1N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
04
.13
32
3.7
72
66
.01
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh2
0.2
56
2.9
65
1.7
3N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A2
0.2
56
2.9
65
1.7
3
Ka
rna
tak
a2
.25
7.0
05
.76
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.2
57
.00
5.7
6
Ke
rala
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Ma
ha
rash
tra
1.5
74
.90
4.0
2N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
.57
4.9
04
.02
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
54
4.1
21
69
1.8
81
39
0.0
6N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A5
44
.12
1 6
91
.88
1 3
90
.06
Ori
ssa
20
6.4
46
41
.91
52
7.4
0N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A2
06
.44
64
1.9
15
27
.40
Pu
nja
b1
.67
5.1
94
.27
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.6
75
.19
4.2
7
Ra
jas
tha
n7
4.3
52
31
.18
18
9.9
4N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A7
4.3
52
31
.18
18
9.9
4
Tam
il N
ad
u1
78
5.6
15
55
2.1
24
56
1.6
7N
AN
AN
AN
AN
AN
A1
78
5.6
15
55
2.1
24
56
1.6
7
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh9
56
.60
2 9
74
.41
24
43
.80
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
95
6.6
02
97
4.4
12
44
3.8
0
We
st B
en
ga
l2
71
.07
84
2.8
6 6
92
.50
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
27
1.0
78
42
.86
69
2.5
0
NA
– n
ot
ava
ila
ble
So
urc
eC
om
pil
ed
by
au
tho
rs
Accounting for freshwater quality in India40
Tab
le 1
8
Est
ima
tes
of
eco
no
mic
co
st o
f tr
ea
tme
nt
of
de
gra
de
d f
resh
wa
ter
in I
nd
ia d
uri
ng
th
e p
eri
od
19
93
–20
03
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
for s
urf
ac
e w
ate
r
Trea
tmen
t ex
pen
dit
ure
for g
rou
nd
wa
ter
T
ota
l tre
atm
ent
exp
end
itu
re
Low
er r
an
geU
pp
er r
an
geLo
wer
ra
nge
Up
per
ra
nge
Low
er r
an
geU
pp
er r
an
ge
(*0
.64
)(3
*1
.99
)A
vera
ge(*
0.6
4)
(3*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
(*0
.64
)(*
1.9
9)
Ave
rage
Sta
te(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
(Rs
mill
ion
)(R
s m
illio
n)
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
52
87
6.8
01
64
41
3.8
01
35
08
3.7
01
3.4
24
1.7
33
4.2
95
2 8
90
.22
16
4 4
55
.53
13
5 1
17
.99
Ass
am
16
04
4.8
04
9 8
89
.30
40
98
9.4
57
64
.44
2 3
76
.92
1 9
52
.89
16
80
9.2
45
2 2
66
.22
42
94
2.3
4
Bih
ar
16
3 7
31
.20
50
9 1
01
.70
41
8 2
82
.05
65
7.2
82
04
3.7
31
67
9.1
51
64
38
8.4
85
11
14
5.4
34
19
96
1.2
0
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh3
0 2
01
.60
93
90
8.1
07
7 1
55
.65
.NA
.NA
.NA
30
20
1.6
09
3 9
08
.10
77
15
5.6
5
De
lhi
5 5
80
.80
17
35
2.8
01
4 2
57
.20
10
4.1
33
23
.77
26
6.0
15
68
4.9
31
7 6
76
.57
14
52
3.2
1
Go
a4
6 4
38
.40
14
4 3
94
.40
11
8 6
35
.60
.NA
.NA
.NA
46
43
8.4
01
44
39
4.4
01
18
63
5.6
0
Gu
jara
t3
4 0
09
.60
10
5 7
48
.60
86
88
3.9
0.N
A.N
A.N
A3
4 0
09
.60
10
5 7
48
.60
86
88
3.9
0
Ha
rya
na
19
07
2.0
05
9 3
02
.00
48
72
3.0
0.N
A.N
A.N
A1
9 0
72
.00
59
30
2.0
04
8 7
23
.00
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh5
4 0
28
.80
16
7 9
95
.80
13
8 0
26
.70
20
.25
62
.96
51
.73
54
04
9.0
51
68
05
8.7
61
38
07
8.4
3
Jha
rkh
an
d2
96
9.6
09
23
3.6
07
58
6.4
0.N
A.N
A.N
A2
96
9.6
09
23
3.6
07
58
6.4
0
Ka
rna
tak
a6
6 8
73
.60
20
7 9
35
.10
17
0 8
41
.15
2.2
57
.00
5.7
66
6 8
75
.85
20
7 9
42
.10
17
0 8
46
.91
Ke
rala
40
36
4.8
01
25
50
9.3
01
03
11
9.4
5.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A.N
A
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
31
98
7.2
09
9 4
60
.20
81
71
7.3
05
44
.12
1 6
91
.88
1 3
90
.06
32
53
1.3
21
01
15
2.0
88
3 1
07
.36
Ma
ha
rash
tra
14
2 4
06
.40
44
2 7
94
.90
36
3 8
03
.85
1.5
74
.90
4.0
21
42
40
7.9
74
42
79
9.8
03
63
80
7.8
7
Ma
nip
ur
0.0
00
.00
0.0
0.N
A.N
A.N
A0
.00
0.0
00
.00
Na
ga
lan
d0
.00
0.0
00
.00
.NA
.NA
.NA
0.0
00
.00
0.0
0
Ori
ssa
57
88
1.6
01
79
97
5.6
01
47
86
9.4
02
06
.44
64
1.9
15
27
.40
58
08
8.0
41
80
61
7.5
11
48
39
6.8
0
Pu
nja
b1
2 6
14
.40
39
22
2.9
03
2 2
25
.85
1.6
75
.19
4.2
71
2 6
16
.07
39
22
8.0
93
2 2
30
.12
Ra
jas
tha
n0
.00
0.0
00
.00
74
.35
23
1.1
81
89
.94
74
.35
23
1.1
81
89
.94
Sik
kim
15
36
0.0
04
7 7
60
.00
39
24
0.0
0.N
A.N
A.N
A1
5 3
60
.00
47
76
0.0
03
9 2
40
.00
Tam
il N
ad
u2
8 2
24
.00
87
75
9.0
07
2 1
03
.50
1 7
85
.61
5 5
52
.12
4 5
61
.67
30
00
9.6
19
3 3
11
.12
76
66
5.1
7
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
07
6 9
08
.80
3 3
48
51
3.3
02
75
1 1
65
.45
95
6.6
02
97
4.4
12
44
3.8
01
07
7 8
65
.40
3 3
51
48
7.7
12
75
3 6
09
.25
We
st B
en
ga
l4
33
50
4.0
01
34
7 9
26
.50
1 1
07
46
7.2
52
71
.07
84
2.8
66
92
.50
43
3 7
75
.07
1 3
48
76
9.3
61
10
8 1
59
.75
NA
– n
ot
ava
ila
ble
So
urc
eC
om
pil
ed
by
au
tho
rs
41Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Table 19
Average annual loss due to degradation of fresh water
Lower range Upper range
treatment expenditure treatment expenditure Average expenditure
State (Rs million) (Rs million) (Rs million)
Andhra Pradesh 5 289.02 16 445.55 13 511.80
Assam 1 680.92 5 226.62 4 294.23
Bihar 16 438.85 51 114.54 41 996.12
Chhattisgarh 3 020.16 9 390.81 7 715.57
Delhi 568.49 1 767.66 1 452.32
Goa 4 643.84 14 439.44 11 863.56
Gujarat 3 400.96 10 574.86 8 688.39
Haryana 1 907.20 5 930.20 4 872.30
Himachal Pradesh 5 404.90 16 805.88 13 807.84
Jharkhand 296.96 923.36 758.64
Karnataka 6 687.59 20 794.21 17 084.69
Kerala NA NA NA
Madhya Pradesh 3 253.13 10 115.21 8 310.74
Maharashtra 14 240.80 44 279.98 36 380.79
Manipur NA NA NA
Nagaland NA NA NA
Orissa 5 808.80 18 061.75 14 839.68
Punjab 1 261.61 3 922.81 3 223.01
Rajasthan 7.43 23.12 18.99
Sikkim 1 536.00 4 776.00 3 924.00
Tamil Nadu 3 000.96 9 331.11 7 666.52
Uttar Pradesh 107 786.54 335 148.77 275 360.93
West Bengal 43 377.51 134 876.94 110 815.98
NA – not available
Source Compiled by authors
values. For Kerala, Manipur, and Nagaland, data on water pollution isnot available. The figures in the table also suggest that for AndhraPradesh, the annual damage to water resource (degradation anddepletion) has been about Rs 13.5 billion during 1993–2003. The annualvalue of the damages done to the groundwater and surface water has beenadjusted against the net state domestic product. This adjustment is overand above the conventional adjustment of depreciation in man-madecapital. Table 20 provides the details.
It is clear from the table that for states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Goa, WestBengal, Orissa, Maharashtra, Himachal Pradesh, and Karnataka, theadjusted state domestic products as a percentage of net state domesticproduct is below 98%. Examples include polluted states such as UttarPradesh (82.45%), Bihar (94.57%), and Orissa (96.17%). Coincidentally,these states are the poorest regions of the country. Going by the head countratio of poverty, Bihar, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal had thehighest poverty during the period 1993–2003 (Dev and Ravi 2007). Thehigh correlation between degradation of freshwater ecosystems andincidence of poverty is clear in this case. The water-deficient states likeHaryana, Rajasthan, and Karnataka have less degradation of water where
Accounting for freshwater quality in India42
the percentage is above 99%. Clearly, the poorest states are depleting theirnatural capital at an alarming rate and are not on a sustainable path
Table 20
Adjustment in national accounts due to water pollution (in Rs million)
Average depreciation Adjusted SDP
GSDP NSDP in the stock of water ESDP ESDP/NSDP as % of NSDP
State (2002/03) (2002/03) (Rs million) (3-4) (5/3) (5/3*100)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Andhra Pradesh 1 607 684 1 439 754 13 511.8 1 426 242.2 0.99 99.06
Arunachal Pradesh 19 450.5 17 395.1 NA NA NA NA
Assam 354 314.2 317 208 4 294.23 312 913.77 0.99 98.65
Bihar 897 150.2 787 033 42 754.76 744 278.24 0.95 94.57
Goa 77 711 67 356 11 863.56 55 492.44 0.82 82.39
Gujarat 1 382 850 1 144 047 8 688.39 1 135 358.61 0.99 99.24
Haryana 658 372 579 374 4 872.3 574 501.7 0.99 99.16
Himachal Pradesh 159 460 142 024 13 807.84 128 216.16 0.90 90.28
Jammu and Kashmir 147 495 128 052 NA NA NA NA
Karnataka 1 139 292 1 004 063 17 084.69 986 978.31 0.98 98.30
Kerala 761 819 69 6021 NA NA NA NA
Madhya Pradesh 1 132 756 974 607 16 026.31 958 580.69 0.98 98.36
Maharashtra 2 951 911 2 632 253 36 380.79 2 595 872.21 0.99 98.62
Manipur 35 312 32 047.8 NA NA NA NA
Meghalaya 43 429 38 422.7 NA NA NA NA
Mizoram 17 687.2 16 346.1 NA NA NA NA
Nagaland 36 793.6 34 272 NA NA NA NA
Orissa 446 844.5 387 373 14 839.68 372 533.32 0.96 96.17
Punjab 707 508.7 629 677.5 3 223.01 626 454.49 0.99 99.49
Rajasthan 873 717.5 768 878 18.99 768 859.01 1.00 100.00
Sikkim 11 527.3 10 386.5 3 924 6 462.5 0.62 62.22
Tamil Nadu 1 537 287 1 367 809 7 666.52 1 360 142.48 0.99 99.44
Tripura 60 616.9 56 603.4 NA NA NA NA
Uttar Pradesh 1 796 015 1 568 625 275 360.93 1 293 264.07 0.82 82.45
West Bengal 1 671 371 1 537 807 110 815.98 1 426 991.02 0.93 92.79
UT (Union territories) 767 080 706 390 1 452.32a 704 937.68 1.00 99.79
Total 19 295 458 17 083 829 586 586.1 16 497 242.9 0.97 96.57
GSDP – gross state domestic product; NSDP – net state domestic product; ESDP – Environment Adjusted State Domestic Product;
SDP – state domestic product; NA – not availableaThe average value is available for Delhi only and not for other UTs, data for rest two UTs is not available.
Source Compiled by authors
Conclusions Accounting for fresh water is a vital step towards sustainability,particularly in India where about 70% of the geographical area is arid andsemi-arid. Changes in the quantity and quality of surface water andgroundwater functions affect ecosystem services and qualify to be treatedin a manner analogous to man-made capital. The literature reviewpresented in this monograph shows that various countries have succeededin providing the accounts of water prescribed in the guidelines of thenatural resource accounts of the United Nations.
43Accounting for freshwater quality in India
In the present monograph, an attempt has been made to estimate theeconomic cost of deterioration in water quality, which has shown a steadydecline over the period of study (1993–2003). Water has been divided intotwo categories, namely surface water and groundwater. While time-seriesdata is available for surface water for the period 1993–2003, groundwaterdata is only available for the period 1994–95. Surface water quality ismeasured in terms of parameters such as BOD, COD, total coliforms, andconductivity, while for groundwater, the problem pertains to the presenceof inorganic and organic compounds like arsenic, fluoride, and iron.Groundwater also has the additional problem of increased salinity. Whilesurface water quality problems are mainly man made, the qualityproblems in groundwater can also be naturally occurring, and areaggravated by large-scale withdrawal of groundwater.
Our study has been divided informally into two parts: the first consists ofan estimation of degradation of water quality from 1993–2003. Thedecline in the quality of both surface water and groundwater has beentaken into consideration while assessing the total damage to the quality ofwater. For surface water, two types of deviations have been taken intoconsideration: one, change in water quality during the period 1993–2003,and second, deviations from standard (acceptable) limit. The total volumeof water affected due to contamination has been estimated for bothsurface water and groundwater. For surface water, the total volume of allthe affected rivers in each state has been added to get the total figure. Forgroundwater, the ratio of the affected area to the total state area has beenapproximated to get the final figure. Table 3 shows the extent of metal andinorganic minerals present in the groundwater in different states whileTable 4 shows deviations from the acceptable limit. Tables 10–14 showdeviations in the surface water over the period 1993–2003 along with thedeviations from the acceptable limit.
The second part consists of monetizing the fall in water quality for bothsurface and underground supplies. The economic cost estimated isessentially a function of two variables, namely total volume of waterquantity affected and amount of pollutant in that volume of water. Forsurface water, the cost of reverting water quality to the 1993 level and tothe acceptable level has been estimated. For groundwater, the data showsthat different states are inflicted with different types of pollutants. WestBengal faces arsenic problems, Gujarat and Tamil Nadu face seriousproblems of fluoride, and Madhya Pradesh is plagued with the problemof lead and manganese. BOD, COD, and total coliforms remain asgeneric problem in most of the states and have worsened during theperiod 1993–2003. Costs of both surface water and groundwater havebeen added to get the total economic cost or average depreciation in thestock of water.
The methodology used is the replacement cost approach and is verystraightforward and logical in this case. The treatment cost has beenprojected for the volume of polluted water over and above the acceptable
Accounting for freshwater quality in India44
limit. The replacement cost has been obtained as the range due tovariability in the abatement technology and associated costs. Thus, theannual damage in the water sector has been adjusted as is done in the caseof depreciation of man-made capital.
Some of the key points that emerge from the results tabulated in Tables 19and 20 are as follows.
� In states like Bihar, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, and Sikkim, the incidenceof pollution is quite high and, therefore, the stock of fresh water capitalis depleted in these states.
� In industrialized states like Gujarat, Goa, and Tamil Nadu, the wateravailability may not be very high but these states face pollution at alarger scale. Groundwater pollution contributes significantly to theoverall pollution and hence to the total cost of pollution abatement.
� Of the three major end-uses of water, namely industry, irrigation, anddomestic supply for drinking, only the last use has been taken intoaccount. Water is used in the ratio of 160:10:1 for these usesrespectively. (In our study, we have only studied the cost of treatmentfor drinking water, as our data did not show that the water exceededacceptable limits for industry and irrigation.) This monograph showsthat the cost of treating only the water for drinking purposes is high. Ifthe treatment of water for irrigation and industry was also required orif water quality continued to decline the result would be unsustainable.The cost of treatment would far exceed the state net GDP.
� The volume of groundwater to be treated has been taken as anapproximation using the limited data available. Many of the problemsin groundwater quality remain out of the purview of government data.If all the relevant data were made available, the situation would beshown to be more acute. Even though the CGWB (Central GroundWater Board) data maintains that volume of groundwater is constant,all studies regarding quality of groundwater show that water quality ischanging. This is leading to problems of salinity and chemical seepagedue to extensive use of water in the agriculture sector. Pure sourcesonce contaminated are very difficult to recover as the treatment ofgroundwater at source is complex. If new groundwater blocks areadded to the already long list of problem areas, then the cost oftreatment would rise in a geometric fashion.
� Even without taking the above considerations into account, thedepreciation of freshwater capital is equal to the net state domesticproduct of many states like Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Goa, West Bengal, andso on. If the above considerations are also added up, then the depreciationof freshwater capital would be many times the state domestic product.
The accounting aptly conveys that the apparent growth in the domesticproducts of the states is thriving on the erosion of the natural capital base.The growth in the state GDP is clearly unsustainable and the accountingmethodology and the concerned agencies must take note of this.
45Accounting for freshwater quality in India
References Bartlemus P, Stahmer C, and Tongeren J V. 1998. Integratedenvironmental and economic accounting: framework for SNAsatellite system. Review of Income and Wealth 37(2): 111–148
Branvall G, Eriksson M, Johansson U, Svensson P. 1999. WaterAccounts [Physical and Monetary Data Connected to Abstraction,Use and Discharge of Water in the Swedish NAMEA (NationalAccounting Matrix including Environmental Accounts.)] Stockholm:Statistics Sweden and Environment Statistics
Common M and Stagl S. 2005. Ecological Economics–anintroduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
CGWB (Central Ground Water Board). 1995. Ground WaterResources of India. Faridabad: Central ground water Board,Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 1993. Water Quality–status and statistics. New Delhi: CPCB, Ministry of Environmentand Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 1995. Ground WaterQuality in Problem Areas: status report. New Delhi: CPCB,Ministry of Environment and Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 1998. Water Quality–status and statistics. New Delhi: CPCB, Ministry of Environmentand Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2003. Water Quality inIndia, Status and Trends (1990–2001). New Delhi: CPCB, Ministryof Environment and Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2004 a. PariveshGroundwater. New Delhi: CPCB, Ministry of Environment and Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2004 b. Status of Sewageand Sewage Treatment Plants in Delhi. New Delhi: CPCB,Ministry of Environment and Forests
CWC (Central Water Commission). 2004. Water and RelatedStatistics. New Delhi: Information Systems Organization, WaterResources Information Systems Directorate Water Planning andProjects Wing
Dev S M and Ravi C. 2007. Poverty and inequality: all-India andstates, 1983–2005. Economic and Political Weekly XLII(6): 509–521
Doll P, Kaspar F, and Lehner B. 2003. A global hydrological modelfor deriving water availability indicators: model tuning andvalidation. Journal of hydrology 270: 105–134
Eurostat and the European Commission. 2002. Water Accounts –resultsof pilot studies. Luxembourg: Eurostat and the European Commission
Accounting for freshwater quality in India46
Hamilton K. 1998. Formal models and practical measurementfor greening accounts. In Greening the Accounts, edited by S Simonand J Proops. London: Edword Elgar
Instituto Nacional. 2001. Water Accounts in Spain. Joint ECE/Eurostat Work Session on Methodological Issues of EnvironmentStatistics [Working Paper no. 11, Ottawa, Canada, 1–4 October 2001]
MA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems andHuman Well Being: findings from responses, Chapter 7:Freshwater, Working Group. Washington, DC: Island Press
McLennan W. 2000. Water Account for Australia 1993–94 and1996–97. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics
Moench M. 2000. Environment: reality and myth. A symposiumre-evaluating some prevailing beliefs. Details available at <http://www.india-seminar.com/2000/486/486%20moench.htm>, lastaccessed on 2 March 2007
Pearce D W, Markandya A, and Barbier E. 1989. Blue Print for aGreen Economy. London: Earthscan Publications
Shiklomanov I A and Rodda J. 2003. World Water Resources at theBeginning of the 21st Century. Paris: UNESCO
Statistics New Zealand. 2004. Water Physical Stock Accounts forthe June Years 1995–2001 [Inaugural Report. EnvironmentalAccounts Series]. New Zealand: Information and Publishing ServicesDivision of Statistics New Zealand
Statistics South Africa. 2000. Natural Resource Accounts. WaterQuality Accounts for South Africa. Pretoria: Statistics South Africa
Trewin D. 2004. Water Account for Australia 2000–01. Canberra:Australian Bureau of Statistics
UNSD (United Nations Statistical Division). 1993. IntegratedEnvironmental and Economic Accounting (interim version).[Studies in Methods UN Series F, No. 61. Handbook of NationalAccounting.] New York: United Nations
Woods R and Henderson R. 2003. Surface Water Components ofNew Zealand’s National Water Accounts 1995–2001. [Prepared forStatistics New Zealand and Ministry for the Environment.] NationalInstitute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd
47Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Bibliography Branvall G, Eriksson M, and Franngard P. 2003. Water Accounts 2000–with disaggregation to sea basins. Stockholm: Statistics Sweden
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2002. ArsenicContamination in Grounding water and its Control. New Delhi:CPCB, Ministry of Environment and Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2003. Proceedings of theWorkshop on Environmental Impact Assessment Studies forDevelopmental Projects. New Delhi: Ministry of Environment andForests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2003. Status of SewageTreatment Plants in Ganga Basin. New Delhi: CPCB, Ministry ofEnvironment and Forests
CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board). 2005. Status of WaterQuality in India, 2002–2003. New Delhi: CPCB, Ministry ofEnvironment and Forests
Fitzharris B. 2004. Snow Accounts for New Zealand [Prepared forNIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research)]. NewZealand: Ministry for the Environment and Statistics
Instituto Nacional de Estadistica. March 2004 Spreadsheet. SatelliteWater Accounts in Spain. Series 1997–2001. Balance of WaterMovements Between the Economy and the Environment byEconomic Activity, Period and Products. (Included on CD-RomINEbase) Instituto Nacional de Estadistica
Marcus M, Jacob B, and Yarrow M. 2003. Understanding theDynamics of Groundwater Resources in ‘Rethinking theApproach to Groundwater and Food Security’ FAO inCollaboration with the Institute for Social and EnvironmentalTransition Boulder, Colorado (Chapter 3). [United States ofAmerica, Water Reports 24, ISSN 1020–1203]. Rome: Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations
MoWR (Ministry of Water Resources). 1999. Integrated WaterResource Development – a plan for action [Report of the NationalCommission for Integrated Water Resources Development, Vol. 1].New Delhi: MoWR, Government of India
UN (United Nations). 1997. Accounting and Valuation ofEnvironment. Volume 1: a primer for developing countries. NewYork: UN
United Nations, European Commission, International MonetaryFund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development,World Bank. 2003. Handbook of National Accounting. IntegratedEnvironmental and Economic Accounting. Studies in Methods[Series F, No.61, Rev.1 (ST/ESA/STAT/SER.F/61/Rev.1)]
Accounting for freshwater quality in India48
United Nations (Statistics Division) and UNEP (United NationsEnvironment Programme). 2000. Integrated Environmental andEconomic Accounting—an operational manual. New York: UnitedNations (Statistics Division) and UNEP
White P A and Reeves R R. 2002. The Volume of Groundwater inNew Zealand 1994–2001. Prepared for Statistics New Zealand.Prepared by the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences [Limitedexclusively for and under contract to Statistics, New Zealand].
49Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ap
pe
nd
ix 1
De
tail
s o
f co
nta
min
ati
on
(b
y s
tate
) o
f g
rou
nd
wa
ter
in s
om
e a
rea
s o
f th
e d
istr
icts
du
e t
o v
ari
ou
s co
nta
min
an
ts
Sta
teS
ali
nit
yIr
on
Flu
ori
de
Nit
rate
Ars
en
icH
ea
vy m
eta
ls
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
Ea
st G
od
ava
ri,
We
st—
Pra
ka
sam
, N
ell
ore
,V
ish
akh
ap
atn
am
, E
ast
—A
na
nta
pu
r, M
eh
bo
ob
Go
da
vari
, K
rish
na
,A
na
nta
pu
r, N
alg
on
da
,G
od
ava
ri,
Kri
shn
a,
na
ga
r, P
rak
asa
m,
Gu
ntu
r, P
rak
asa
mR
an
ga
red
dy,
Ad
ila
ba
dP
raka
sam
, N
ell
ore
,V
isa
kh
ap
atn
am
,
Ch
itto
or,
An
an
tap
ur,
Cu
dd
ap
ah
, N
alg
on
da
Cu
dd
ap
ah
, K
urn
oo
l,
Me
hb
oo
bn
ag
ar,
Ra
ng
are
dd
y, M
ed
ak
,
Ad
ila
ba
d,
Na
lgo
nd
a,
Kh
am
ma
m
Ass
am
—N
ort
he
rn B
an
k o
f—
——
Dig
bo
i
Bra
hm
ap
utr
a
Bih
ar
Be
gu
sara
iC
ha
mp
ara
n,
Mu
zaff
arp
ur,
Gir
idih
, Ja
mu
i, D
ha
nb
ad
Pa
lam
au
, G
aya
, P
atn
a,
—D
ha
nb
ad
, M
uza
ffa
rpu
r,
Ga
ya,
Mu
ng
er,
De
og
ha
r,N
ala
nd
a,
Na
wa
da
,B
eg
usa
rai
Ma
dh
ub
an
i, P
atn
a,
Pa
lam
au
,B
ha
ga
lpu
r, S
ah
eb
gu
nj,
Na
lan
da
, N
aw
ad
a,
Ba
nk
a B
an
ka
Gu
jara
tB
an
ask
an
tha
, Ju
na
ga
rh,
—K
ach
ch,
Su
ren
dra
na
ga
r,—
——
Bh
ara
uch
, S
ura
t,R
ajk
ot,
Ah
me
da
ba
d,
Me
hsa
na
, A
hm
ed
ab
ad
,M
eh
san
a,
Ba
na
ska
nth
a,
Su
ren
dra
na
ga
r, K
he
da
,S
ab
ark
an
tha
.
Jam
na
ga
r
Ha
rya
na
So
ne
pa
t, R
oh
tak
, H
issa
r,—
Ro
hta
k,
Jin
d,
His
sar,
Am
ba
la,
So
ne
pa
t, J
ind
,—
Fari
da
ba
d
Sir
sa,
Fari
da
ba
d,
Jin
d,
Bh
iwa
ni,
Ma
he
nd
rag
arh
,G
urg
ao
n,
Fari
da
ba
d,
Gu
rga
on
, B
hiw
an
i,Fa
rid
ab
ad
His
sar,
Sir
sa,
Ka
rna
l,
Ma
he
nd
rag
arh
Ku
ruk
she
tra
, R
oh
tak
,
Bh
iwa
ni,
Ma
he
nd
rag
arh
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh—
——
Ku
lu,
So
lan
, U
na
—P
urw
an
oo
, K
ala
am
b
Ka
rna
tak
aB
ija
pu
r, B
elg
au
m,
—Tu
mk
ur,
Ko
lar,
Ba
ng
alo
re,
——
Bh
ad
raw
ati
Ra
ich
ur,
Be
lla
ry,
Gu
lba
rga
, B
ell
ary
, R
aic
hu
r
Dh
arw
ar
Co
nti
nu
ed
Accounting for freshwater quality in India50
Sta
teS
ali
nit
yIr
on
Flu
ori
de
Nit
rate
Ars
en
icH
ea
vy m
eta
ls
Ke
rala
Ern
aku
lam
, Tr
ich
ur,
—P
alg
ha
t—
——
All
ep
pe
y
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
Gw
ali
or,
Bh
ind
, M
ore
na
,—
Bh
ind
, M
oe
ran
a,
Gu
na
,S
eh
ore
—B
ast
ar,
Ko
rba
, R
atl
am
,
Jha
bu
a,
Kh
arg
ao
n,
Dh
ar,
Jha
bu
a,
Ch
hin
dw
ara
, S
eo
ni,
Na
gd
a
Sh
ivp
uri
, S
ha
jap
ur,
Gu
na
,M
an
dla
, R
aip
ur,
Vid
ish
a
Ma
nd
sor,
Ujj
ain
Ma
ha
rash
tra
Am
ara
vati
, A
kola
—B
ha
nd
ara
, C
ha
nd
rap
ur,
Tha
ne
, Ja
lna
, B
ee
d,
——
Na
nd
ed
, A
ura
ng
ab
ad
Na
nd
ed
, La
tur,
Osm
an
ab
ad
, S
ola
pu
r,
Sa
tara
, S
an
gli
, K
olh
ap
ur,
Dh
ule
, Ja
lga
on
,
Au
ran
ga
ba
d,
Ah
me
dn
ag
ar,
Pu
ne
, B
uld
an
a,
Am
rava
ti,
Ako
la,
Na
gp
ur,
Wa
rdh
a,
Bh
an
da
ra,
Ch
an
dra
pu
r,
Ga
dc
hir
oli
Ori
ssa
Cu
tta
ck,
Ba
lesw
ar,
Pu
riP
art
s o
f C
oa
sta
l Ori
ssa
Bo
lan
gir
——
An
gu
l, T
alc
he
r
Pu
nja
bB
ha
tin
da
, S
an
gru
r,—
Lud
hia
na
, Fa
rid
kot,
Pa
tia
la,
Fari
dko
t,—
Lud
hia
na
, M
an
di,
Fari
dko
t, F
iro
zpu
rB
ha
tin
da
, S
an
gru
r,F
iro
zpu
r, S
an
gru
r,G
ob
ind
ga
rh
Jala
nd
ha
r, A
mri
tsa
rB
ha
tin
da
Ra
jast
ha
nB
ha
ratp
ur,
Ja
ipu
r,B
ika
ne
r, A
lwa
r, D
un
ga
rpu
rB
arm
er,
Bik
an
er,
Jaip
ur,
Ch
uru
,—
Pa
li,
Ud
aip
ur,
Kh
etr
i
Na
ga
ur,
Ja
lore
, S
iro
hi,
Ga
ng
an
ag
ar,
Ja
lore
,G
an
ga
na
ga
r, B
ika
ne
r,
Jod
hp
ur
Na
ga
ur,
Pa
li,
Sir
oh
iJa
lore
, B
arm
er,
Bu
nd
i,
Sw
ai
Ma
dh
op
ur
Tam
il N
ad
uK
ara
ika
l, P
on
dic
he
rry,
—D
ha
ram
pu
ri,
Sa
lem
, N
ort
hC
oim
ba
tore
, P
eri
yar,
—M
an
ali
, N
ort
h A
rco
t
Na
ga
pa
tta
na
m,
Arc
ot—
Am
be
dk
ar,
Sa
lem
Qu
ide
—M
ille
t, P
ud
uko
tta
i,V
illi
pu
ram
—P
ad
aya
tch
i,
Ra
ma
na
nth
ap
ura
m,
Mu
thu
ram
ali
ng
am
,
No
rth
Arc
ot
—A
mb
ed
ka
r,Ti
ruc
hir
ap
all
i, P
ud
uko
tta
i
Dh
ara
mp
uri
, S
ale
m,
Tric
hy,
Co
imb
ato
re
Co
nti
nu
ed
Ap
pe
nd
ix
1Continued
51Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Sta
teS
ali
nit
yIr
on
Flu
ori
de
Nit
rate
Ars
en
icH
ea
vy m
eta
ls
Trip
ura
—D
ha
ram
na
ga
r,—
——
—
Ka
ule
sha
he
r, K
ho
wa
i,
Am
ba
sa,
Am
ap
ur
an
d
Pa
rts
of
Ag
art
ala
Va
lle
y
Utt
ar
Pra
de
shA
gra
, M
ath
ura
,B
ula
nd
sha
ha
r, A
lig
arh
,O
rai,
Jh
an
si,
Lali
tpu
r,—
Sin
gra
uli
, B
ast
i, K
an
pu
r,
Ma
inp
uri
, B
an
md
a.
—A
gra
, U
nn
ao
, R
ae
—B
are
liFa
iza
ba
d,
Su
lta
np
ur,
Jau
np
ur,
All
ah
ab
ad
,
Ma
ha
rajg
an
j,S
ah
ara
np
ur,
Ali
ga
rh
Go
rakh
ap
ur,
De
ori
a
We
st B
en
ga
l—
Mid
na
po
re,
Ho
wra
h,
Bir
bh
um
Utt
ar
Din
ajp
ur,
Ma
lad
a,
Ma
lda
, S
ou
th—
24
Du
rga
pu
r, H
ow
rah
,
Ho
og
hli
, B
an
kura
Bir
bh
um
, N
ad
ia,
Pa
rag
an
as,
Na
dia
,M
urs
hid
ab
ad
, N
ad
ia
Mid
na
pu
r, H
ow
rah
,H
oo
gly
, M
urs
hid
ab
ad
,
Mu
rsh
ida
ba
d,
Pu
ruli
aB
ard
ha
ma
n,
Ho
wra
h
Na
tio
na
l C
ap
ita
lN
aja
fga
rh,
Ka
njh
aw
ala
,—
—C
ity
Sh
ah
da
ra a
nd
—A
lip
ur,
Ka
njh
aw
ala
,
Terr
ito
ry o
f D
elh
ia
nd
Me
hra
uli
Blo
cks
Me
hra
uli
Blo
cks
Na
jafg
arh
, M
eh
rau
li C
ity
an
d S
ha
hd
ara
Blo
cks
So
urc
eC
PC
B (
19
95
)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India52
Number of lakes/
Number of Number tanks/drains,
State water bodies of rivers and so on
Andhra Pradesh 8 3 5
Assam 2 2
Delhi 1 1
Jharkhand 1 1
Gujarat 10 9 1
Haryana 3 2 1
Himachal Pradesh 2 1 1
Karnataka 6 4 2
Madhya Pradesh 5 4 1
Maharashtra 15 15
Meghalaya 5 1 4
Orissa 5 5
Punjab 3 3
Rajasthan 3 3
Tamil Nadu 7 7
Sikkim 1 1
Uttar Pradesh 8 8
West Bengal 1 1
Total 86 71 15
Source CPCB (1993, 1998)
Appendix 2
Polluted stretches
(by state) in rivers
and lakes
Critical parameters
River Polluted stretch Source/town (in mg/l)
Andhra Pradesh
Godavari Polavaram to D/S of Rajamundary and Polavaram BOD: 6–12
Rajamundary sewage
Nagavalli Nagavalli along Industrial and domestic BOD: 6–10
Thotapalli Regulator water from Rayagada
Musi D/S of Hyderabad Hyderabad–Securanderabad BOD: 16–44
sewage
Lake Kishtra Reddy Pet Tank, Medak sewage BOD: 9–28
Medak
Dharamsagar tank, Warangal Warangal sewage BOD: 7.5–9.4
Hussain Sagar Lake Hyderabad–Securandabad BOD: 8–19
sewage
Sarronagar Lake Ranga Reddy Hyderabad BOD: 8.0–12.5
Pulicate Lake, Nellore Nellore sewage BOD: 8–12.1
Assam
Kalong Elengabeel System Nagaon sewage BOD: 10–70
Bharalu D/S Guwahati Guwahati sewage BOD: 38
Delhi
Yamuna Wazirabad to Okhla Industrial and domestic BOD: 6–77
waste from Delhi
Jharkhand
Subarnrekha Ranchi to D/S of Industrial and domestic BOD:
Jamshedpur waste from Ranchi and
Jamshedpur
Gujarat
Sabarmati Ahmedabad to D/S of Discharge from Meshwa BOD: 56–504
Vautha and Ahemdabad
Kankoria Lake, Municipal and industrial waste BOD: 6–29
Ahemdabad from Ahemdabad
Amlakhadi Along Ankeshwar Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 138–920
from Ankeshwar Ammonia: 117.6–201.60
Appendix 3
List of polluted river
stretches
Continued
53Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Critical parameters
River Polluted stretch Source/town (in mg/l)
Shedi Along Kheda Kheda sewage BOD: 8–19
Damanganga Vapi D/S to confluence Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 9–10
with sea from Vapi, Salvas, Daman
and Kachigaon
Ambika Billimora D/S Billimora sewage BOD: 18
Bhadar Jetpur to Ratia (Junagarh) Jetpur and Dhoraji sewage BOD: 33
Khari Lali village, Ahemdabad BOD: 92–675
Kolak Vapi to Patalia. Vapi Industrial township BOD: 11–35
Phase-III, IV and Daman
Industrial area
Par Vapi to Patalia Atul township and industrial BOD: 27
waste water, Pardi, and
Umarkhadi waste water
Haryana
Ghaggar Interstate border with Punjab Industrial and municipal waste BOD: 8–50
to Ottu wier at Sirsa from Sirsa
Yamuna Okhla to Kosi Kalan Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 16
from Faridabad and Palwal
Drain No. 8 Sonepat to confluence with Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 6–36
Yamuna of Sonepat
Himachal Pradesh
Markanda Kala Amb D/S to Haryana Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 55
Border from Kala Amb Colour: 1009 Hazen
Lake Renuka Lake BOD: 8
Karnataka
Bhadra Maleshwaram to D/S of Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 7.2
Bhadravathi from Bhadravathi
Tunga D/S of Shimoga Shimoga sewage BOD
Kali Along Dandeli Town West Coast Paper Mill waste BOD
Tungabhadra Harihar D/S to Hara Harihar sewage and Grasim BOD: 6–8
eahalli Bridge. waste
Heballa Valley Lake Mandya Mandya sewage BOD: 6–36
Ulsoor Lake Bangalore sewage BOD: 6–18
Madhya Pradesh
Khan river Indore city to confluence Indore sewage BOD: 65–120
with Kshipra
Kshipra Ujjain to confluence with Ujjain sewage BOD: 8–24
Chambal
Chambal D/S of Nagda Industrial waste – Grasim BOD: 8–24
and Nagda Sewage
Tapi D/S of Napanagar to Domestic and industrial waste BOD
Burhanpur city water from Nepanagar
and Burhanpur
Lower and Upper Bhopal sewage BOD: 6–8
Lake, Bhopal
Maharashtra
Godavari Nasik to (Raher) Nanded Sewage from Nasik, BOD: 6–66
Chanderpur, Nanded, Raher
Kalu Atale village to Confluence BOD: 6–10
with Ulhas
Ulhas Mohane to Baddapur Industrial and domestic BOD: 6–8
run-off Ulhasnagar
Weinganga D/S Ashti Ashti town BOD: 6–7
Panchganga Along Ichalkaranji Ichalkaranji BOD: 7–25
Wardha Along Rajura village Paper mill waste BOD: 6–8
Bhima Pargaon to Confluence Pune Sewage Nira discharge BOD: 6.5
with river Daund
Continued
Accounting for freshwater quality in India54
Critical parameters
River Polluted stretch Source/town (in mg/l)
Mula and Mutha D/S Pune city City sewage of Pune BOD: 6.7
Bhatsa D/S of shahpur Industrial Industrial township, Shahpur BOD
township.
Patalganga Khopoli to Esturaine region Industrial and municipal BOD: 6
sewage from khopoli, Rasayani,
and Paundh
Kundalika Along Roha city Roha city sewage BOD: 6–6.5
Krishna Dhomdam to Sangli Sewage and industrial waste BOD: 6–8
from Karnal and Sangli
Tapi Madhya Pradesh Border Bhusaval sewage BOD: 6–9
to Bhusaval
Girna Malegaon to confluence with Tapi Malegaon sewage BOD: 6–12
Nira Along Pulgaon Pulgaon Cotton Mill BOD: 6–21
Meghalaya
Kharkhala Near Sutnga Khlieri, Jaintia Hills BOD: 8–10
Umiam Lake, Barapani Sewage from Shillong BOD: 7–13
Wards Lake, Shillong BOD: 9–12.2
Umtrew Lake, Byrnihat East BOD: 7–9
Thadlaskein Lake Shillong BOD: 7–9
Orissa
Brahmani Panposh D/S to Dharamsala Sewage and industrial waste BOD: 6–7
from Panposh, Rourkela,
Talcher, Dharamsala
Ib Sundargarh to confluence Sewage and industrial waste BOD: 6–9
with Mahanadi from Sundargarh, Jharsuguda,
and Brajrajnagar
Mahanadi Cuttack D/S Cuttack sewage BOD: 6–8
Kuakhai Along Bubhaneshwar Bhubaneshwar sewage BOD: 7
Kathjodi Along Cuttack Cuttack sewage BOD: 6–12.3
Punjab
Satluj D/S of Ludhiana Sewage from Ludhiana and BOD: 8–14.4
Jalandar
Beas D/S of Mukorian Industrial discharge from BOD: 8.4–20
Goindwal and Mukarian
Ghaggar Mubarkpur to Sardulgarh Municipal and industrial BOD: 6.4–50
discharge from Patiala,
Sukhna paper mills, and
Derra Bassi
Rajasthan
Ghaggar Ottu weir to Hanumangarh Industrial and domestic waste BOD
from Haryana and Punjab
Chambal D/S Kota city Industrial and domestic waste BOD: 6–6.4
from Kota
Banas / Berach river Udaipur to Chittorgarh Municipal waste from Udaipur BOD
and Chittorgarh
Tamil Nadu
Vaigai Along Madurai Madurai: industrial and BOD: 7–9
domestic waste water
Palar Vaniyambadi Vaniyambadi: industrial and BOD
municipal waste water
Adyar Along Chennai Chennai: industrial and BOD
municipal waste water
Coovum Along Chennai Chennai: industrial and BOD
municipal waste water
Tambiraparani Papavinasam to Arunuganeri Madura Coats industrial waste BOD: 6–13
Continued
Appendix 3 Continued
55Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Critical parameters
River Polluted stretch Source/town (in mg/l)
Noyyal Along coimbatoor, Tirupur, Industrial and domestic waste BOD
Palyanakotti water from Coimbatore,
Tirupur, and Palyanakotti
Cauvery D/S of Mettur Dam to Municipal sewage of Erode BOD: 6.4–7
Erode city
Sikkim
Ranichu Along Ranipur Municipal waste water, Ranipur BOD: 24
Uttar Pradesh
Yamuna Kosi Kalan to confluence with Sewage from Agra, Vindravan, BOD: 6–37
Chambal Mathura, and Etawah
Hindon Saharanpur to confluence with Sewage and industrial effluent BOD: 9–36
Yamuna from Saharanpur, Muzaffurnagar
and Ghaziabad
Western Kali Muzaffar Nagar to Sewage and industrial effluents BOD: 21–44
confluence with Hindon from Muzaffarnagar and
Mansoorpur
Buri Yamuna Pilkhani to Confluence Industrial effluent of Pilkhani BOD
with Yamauna Distillary
Kali Nadi Eastern Merrut to Kannauj Industrial and municipal BOD: 43–135
sewage from, Meerut,
Modinagar, Bulandsahar,
Hapur, Gulwati, and Kannauj
Gomti Lucknow to Confluence Sewage and industrial effluent BOD: 6–8.2
with Ganga from Lucknow, Sultanpur, and BOD: 6–7.6
Jaunpur
Ganga Kannauj to Kanpur D/S Discharge through Kalinadi BOD: 6–10
and Ramganga sewage and
industrial effluent from
Kannauaj and Kanpur
Varanasi D/S Varanasi sewage and BOD: 6.5–16.5
industrial effluent
West Bengal
Damodar Durgapur to Haldia Industrial waste and sewage BOD: 6.4–32
from Durgapaur and Asansol
BOD – biochemical oxygen demand
Source CPCB (1993, 1998)
Name of tank/lake/drain/pond, and so on
Kishtra Reddy Pet Tank, Andhra Pradesh
Dharamsagar Tank, Andhra Pradesh
Hussain Sagar Lake, Andhra Pradesh
Sarronagar Lake, Andhra Pradesh
Pulicate Lake, Andhra Pradesh
Drain No. 8, Haryana
Renuka Lake, Himachal Pradesh
Heballa Valley Lake, Karnataka
Ulsoor Lake, Karnataka
Lower & Upper Lake, Madhya Pradesh
Umiam Lake, Meghalaya
Wards Lake, Meghalaya
Umtrew Lake, Meghalaya
Thadlaskein, Meghalaya
Kankoria Lake, Gujarat
Source CPCB (1993, 1998)
Appendix 4
Polluted lakes/
tanks/drains
Accounting for freshwater quality in India56
Number of
polluted
River stretches
Godavari 2
Nagavalli 1
Musi 1
Kalong 1
Bharalu 1
Yamuna 3
Subranekha 1
Sabarmati 1
Amlakhadi 1
Shedi 1
Damanganga 1
Ambika 1
Bhadar 1
Khari 1
Kolak 1
Par 1
Ghaggar 3
Markanda 1
Bhadra 1
Tunga 1
Kali 1
Tungabhadra 1
Khan 1
Kshipra 1
Chambal 2
Tapi 2
Kalu 1
Ulhas 1
Weinganga 1
Panchganga 1
Wardha 1
Bhima 1
Number of
polluted
River stretches
Mula and Mutha 1
Bhatsa 1
Patalganga 1
Kundalika 1
Krishna 1
Girna 1
Nira 1
Kharkhala 1
Brahmani 1
Ib 1
Mahanadi 1
Kuakhai 1
Kathjodi 1
Satluj 1
Beas 1
Banas/Berach 1
Vaigai 1
Palar 1
Adyar 1
Coovum 1
Tambiraparani 1
Noyyal 1
Cauvery 1
Ranichu 1
Hindon 1
Western Kali 1
Buri Yamuna 1
Kali Nadi Eastern 1
Gomti 1
Ganga 2
Damodar 1
Total 71
Appendix 5
Polluted stretches
(by river)
Source CPCB (1993, 1998)
57Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ap
pe
nd
ix 6
De
via
tio
n o
f a
ctu
al w
ate
r q
ua
lity
fro
m t
he
acc
ep
tab
le li
mit
fo
r ir
rig
ati
on
use
in 2
00
3
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter q
ua
lity
Acc
epta
ble
lim
it
D
iffer
ence
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
27
55
.25
3 1
98
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
75
-94
.8-2
45
2 1
98
NA
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h1
5.9
82
86
41
.96
31
9 6
172
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A6
14
-98
.04
-21
98
617
NA
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h6
.81
43
62
.45
10
.51
49
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
14
-97.
55
-23
9.5
-85
1N
A
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
73
65
2.7
16
32
19
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
88
5-9
7.3
-23
43
1 1
92
NA
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h5
.54
1 4
88
11
.65
94
.28
92
.53
.72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-7
62
-88
.35
-15
5.8
-10
7.5
NA
Pen
ner
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
67
74.5
2.7
51
5.5
78
10
.93
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
47
5.5
-97.
25
-23
4.5
-21
9N
A
Tun
gbh
ad
raA
nd
hra
Pra
des
h9
.26
63
02
.15
13
.42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
62
0-9
7.8
5-2
36
.6-1
00
0N
A
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
92
22
11
3.0
85
71
56
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
02
8-9
9-2
36
.92
57
0 5
65
NA
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
817
31
.59
.65
6 4
60
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
77
-98
.5-2
40
.45
5 4
60
NA
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
53
84
1.2
19
1 1
38
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
66
-98
.8-2
31
13
8N
A
Ga
nga
Bih
ar
49
.50
374
1.6
71
6.1
3 2
08
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
76
-98
.33
-23
3.9
2 2
08
NA
Gh
agh
ara
Bih
ar
23
.15
31
81
.41
9.5
2 0
13
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
32
-98
.6-2
30
.51
01
3N
A
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
19
11
.41
8.7
2 6
33
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
59
-98
.6-2
31
.31
63
3N
A
Ha
sde
vC
hh
att
isga
rh1
3.1
12
.12
62
90
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-9
7.9
-22
4-7
10
NA
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
23
91
.42
2.8
37
0.2
42
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
11-9
8.6
-22
7.2
-96
3N
A
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
20
.97
20
41
.83
0.3
56
6.3
30
.27
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
46
-98
.2-2
19
.65
-93
3.6
7N
A
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
garh
13
.11
31
01
.95
26
.43
36
0.2
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
94
0-9
8.0
5-2
23
.6-6
64
NA
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
65
3.5
17.8
58
85
79
6 6
68
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
59
6.5
-82
.2-1
92
85
79
5 6
69
NA
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
83
6 5
15
2.8
11
15
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A3
4 2
65
-97.
2-2
39
-84
5N
A
Zua
riG
oa
36
.28
24
31
82
.31
11
63
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
22
06
8-9
7.7
-23
9-8
37
NA
Da
ma
nga
nga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
5 7
55
2.8
54
26
0.1
71
0.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
3 5
05
-97.
15
-20
8-9
39
.83
NA
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
82
1 0
82
95
8.8
3 6
62
.41
2 7
83
33
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A1
8 8
32
85
8.8
341
2.4
12
78
2 3
33
NA
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
28
11
.14
13
45
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
69
-98
.86
-23
7-9
55
NA
Mes
hw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
40
21
.98
7 5
08
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
48
-98
.1-2
42
6 5
08
NA
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
26
81
.21
6.7
56
8.7
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
98
2-9
8.8
-23
3.2
5-9
31
.25
NA
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
21
20
84
02
77
37
5 0
03
.33
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 0
42
-60
27
374
00
3.3
NA
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
1 2
412
0.6
10
1.3
79
39
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
00
9-7
9.4
-14
8.7
78
39
5N
A
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
93
37
1.9
33
574
0.3
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
13
-98
.07
-24
7-4
26
NA
Gh
agg
ar
Ha
rya
na
23
.43
84
49
.37
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
40
6-9
0.7
-17
2-1
00
0N
A
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
05
61
.81
0.8
37.
68
44
85
2 7
52
.42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
68
8.2
-89
.2-2
12
.32
44
851
75
2N
A
Bea
nH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h2
5.6
02
09
1.3
63
.79
35
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
41-9
8.6
4-2
46
.3-6
5N
A
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h4
6.0
01
89
0.7
85
92
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
61
-99
.3-2
42
-40
8N
A
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h1
0.0
91
92
0.7
52
.54
02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
05
8-9
9.2
5-2
47.
5-9
60
NA
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
hN
A2
62
0.3
77.
71
49
92
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
98
8-9
9.6
3-2
42
.29
-50
1N
A
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l Pra
des
h2
.73
1 0
45
3.4
42
13
7.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 2
05
-96
.6-2
08
-86
2.5
NA
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aJh
ark
ha
nd
4.6
42
09
1.8
73
1.7
51
04
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
041
-98
.13
-21
8.2
54
2N
A
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka1
3.1
12
71
3.1
61
55
20
.19
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
79
-96
.84
-25
05
52
NA
Co
nti
nu
ed
Accounting for freshwater quality in India58
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
taka
16
.73
48
71
.62
2.6
66
97
90
.26
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 7
63
-98
.4-2
27.
34
5 9
79
NA
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka8
.36
25
61
.06
21
.62
18
50
.33
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
99
4-9
8.9
4-2
28
.41
18
5N
A
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka9
.46
52
51
.75
71
.71
01
92
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
72
5-9
8.2
5-1
78
.31
9N
A
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka8
.16
28
71
.12
21
04
60
.19
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
96
3-9
8.9
-22
84
6N
A
Kri
shn
aK
arn
ata
ka1
5.5
23
171
.65
22
.82
96
70
.21
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
33
-98
.35
-22
7.2
1 9
67
NA
Ma
l Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka1
2.5
74
47
1.4
62
7.1
61
40
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
80
3-9
8.5
4-2
22
.84
40
6N
A
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka1
6.7
35
87
1.2
23
2 0
91
0.4
95
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 6
63
-98
.8-2
27
1 0
91
NA
Tun
gbh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka3
.85
18
92
.63
81
55
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
06
1-9
7.4
-21
25
52
NA
Ach
enko
ilK
era
la4
.31
66
1.9
25
.65
55
00
.35
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
84
-98
.1-2
24
.44
55
0N
A
Bh
ava
ni
Ker
ala
0.0
01
09
0.3
3.2
87
50
.19
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
41-9
9.7
-24
6.8
-12
5N
A
Ch
aliy
ar
Ker
ala
16
.73
2 0
69
0.4
58
.41
45
02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
81
-99
.55
-241
.64
50
NA
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
81
0.6
3.2
82
50
.15
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
69
-99
.4-2
46
.8-1
75
NA
Ma
nim
ala
Ker
ala
16
.73
58
0.7
14
.43
06
20
.34
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
19
2-9
9.3
-23
5.6
2 0
62
NA
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
31
117
1.1
20
.81
4 8
66
0.9
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
13
3-9
8.9
-22
9.2
13
86
6N
A
Per
iya
rK
era
la1
6.7
33
34
1.4
6.4
39
00
.02
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
16
-98
.6-2
43
.6-6
10
NA
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
28
42
.12
69
24
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
66
-97.
9-2
24
-76
NA
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
des
h9
.56
1 0
35
2.7
71
1.9
26
36
19
80
.22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
21
5-9
7.2
3-2
38
.08
63
5 1
98
NA
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
1 5
46
30
1 6
00
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-70
4-7
0-2
50
60
0N
A
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.50
82
04
.92
02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
43
0-9
5.1
-23
0-1
00
0N
A
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
92
54
25
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-10
0-2
25
-57
5N
A
Ma
nd
aki
ni
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
63
45
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-94
-25
0-6
55
NA
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
217
1.8
22
1.4
179
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
33
-98
.18
-22
8.6
-82
1N
A
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
71
91
1.6
18
.76
66
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
59
-98
.4-2
31
.3-3
34
NA
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
des
h5
.11
13
21
.26
17.3
31
26
.66
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
18
-98
.74
-23
2.6
7-8
73
.34
NA
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
des
h2
6.8
55
.95
43
5.5
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 2
50
-94
.05
-25
0-5
64
.5N
A
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.40
35
3.5
2.2
52
0.5
29
22
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
89
6.5
-97.
75
-22
9.5
-70
8N
A
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
44
51
6.1
82
42
78
0.3
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
80
5-8
3.8
2-2
26
-72
2N
A
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
29
56
52
54
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
55
-94
-24
5-7
46
NA
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
48
28
.08
93
27
80
.95
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 7
68
-91
.92
-15
7-7
22
NA
Kri
shn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
04
48
6.3
34
26
50
.96
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
02
-93
.7-2
16
-73
5N
A
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
83
98
6.5
22
80
.74
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
85
2-9
3.5
-25
0-7
72
NA
Pa
talg
an
gaM
ah
ara
shtr
aN
A1
21
5.3
24
21
40
.52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
12
9-9
4.7
-22
6-7
86
NA
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
46
75
.94
.66
23
10
.06
55
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 7
83
-94
.1-2
45
.34
-76
9N
A
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
12
85
.73
22
18
0.4
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
12
2-9
4.3
-21
8-7
82
NA
Wa
inga
nga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
274
5.8
32
18
30
.28
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
97
6-9
4.2
-21
8-8
17N
A
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
83
77
5.2
173
0.9
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
87
3-9
4.8
-25
0-8
27
NA
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
rN
A1
03
2.4
60
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
47
-97.
6-2
50
-94
0N
A
Dh
am
siri
Na
gala
nd
0.0
02
26
4.3
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
02
4-9
5.6
2-2
50
-1 0
00
NA
Ba
ita
rni
Ori
ssa
17.7
35
64
21
.66
4 4
37
0.0
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A3
39
2-9
8.3
4-2
50
3 4
37
NA
Bra
hm
an
iO
riss
a1
2.3
91
60
174
.23
39
91
.41
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
90
-83
-24
5.8
2 3
99
NA
IBO
riss
a8
.88
14
71
.55
3 5
39
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 1
03
-98
.45
-25
02
53
9N
A
Ku
akh
ai
Ori
ssa
NA
18
02
.25
4 7
79
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
70
-97.
75
-25
03
77
9N
A
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter q
ua
lity
Acc
epta
ble
lim
it
Diff
eren
ce
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Ap
pe
nd
ix
6Continued
59Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ma
ha
na
di
Ori
ssa
29
.02
45
85
.51
.86
24
5 7
06
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
2 3
35
.5-9
8.1
4-2
26
4 7
06
NA
Na
gava
lliO
riss
a8
.24
43
12
.25
7 4
80
0.4
04
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
19
-97.
75
-25
06
48
0N
A
Ru
shik
uly
aO
riss
a1
3.1
19
20
61
.85
15
00
.65
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
6 9
56
-98
.2-2
50
4 1
50
NA
Su
ba
rna
rekh
aO
riss
a1
.07
274
1.7
23
30
0.3
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
97
6-9
8.3
2 0
80
-1 0
00
NA
Bea
nP
un
jab
20
.94
27
72
.06
6.2
27
83
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
73
-97.
94
-24
3.7
8-2
17N
A
Gh
agg
ar
Pu
nja
b1
4.6
64
74.0
32
.09
4.0
3 6
58
.02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
77
6-6
8-1
56
2 6
58
NA
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
54
93
12
.82
52
94
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
75
7-8
7.2
-22
51
94
4N
A
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
38
74
.52
12
.58
5 0
76
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 8
63
-95
.48
-23
7.4
24
07
6N
A
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
31
4.6
71
.63
8.1
77
37
0.1
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
93
5.3
3-9
8.3
7-2
41.8
3-2
63
NA
Ma
hi
Ra
jast
ha
n0
.93
510
1.7
8.1
91
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
74
0-9
8.3
-241
.9-8
6N
A
Test
aS
ikki
m2
4.0
02
78
8.5
51
99
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
72
-91
.45
-25
0-8
01
NA
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
32
33
1.6
13
.81
24
32
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
017
-98
.4-2
36
.22
43
NA
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
28
23
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
57
3-9
7.8
7-1
96
.78
3N
A
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
33
33
1.8
21
.72
51
0.2
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
917
-98
.2-2
28
.3-7
49
NA
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h2
0.9
32
84
2.1
27
1 1
00
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
66
-97.
9-2
23
10
0N
A
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
95
48
2.2
11
.92
54
2 5
83
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 7
02
-97.
8-2
38
.12
541
58
3N
A
Ga
nga
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h1
49
.01
25
72
.91
17.0
52
1 3
30
0.8
46
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 9
93
-97.
09
-23
2.9
52
0 3
30
NA
Gh
agh
ara
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h1
08
.80
35
11
.32
1.0
51
12
02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
89
9-9
8.7
-22
8.9
51
20
NA
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h2
50
.00
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
12
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-9
7.5
-23
4.5
17 7
98
NA
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
0.0
09
56
29
.86
617
63
33
5 6
53
.66
.32
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 2
94
-70
.13
4-7
43
33
4 6
54
NA
Ka
lind
iU
tta
r P
rad
esh
NA
70
33
4.9
22
19
16
3 3
05
56
1.7
17.6
62
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
54
7-6
5.0
8-3
11
.63
E+
08
NA
Ra
mga
nga
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h1
51
.33
44
64
.711
24
42
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
80
4-9
5.3
-25
01
0 2
44
NA
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h2
50
.00
40
82
.22
2.8
12
82
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
84
2-9
7.8
-22
7.2
-87
2N
A
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
22
3.5
24
22
45
40
.00
72
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
02
6.5
-98
-20
81
45
4N
A
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
des
h1
95
.00
33
13
.31
66
97
52
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-1
91
9-9
6.7
-23
45
97
5N
A
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
67
66
6.6
22
9.1
24
0 8
26
49
40
.36
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 4
84
-93
.38
-22
0.8
84
0 8
25
49
4N
A
Ba
rake
rW
est B
enga
l2
50
.00
1.2
70
00
02
25
01
00
25
01
00
0N
A-2
25
0-9
8.8
-25
06
9 0
00
NA
Da
mo
da
rW
est B
enga
l1
25
.86
89
11
.83
16
.42
52
17
9.6
0.1
38
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 3
59
-98
.17
-23
3.6
25
1 1
79
.6N
A
Ga
nga
Wes
t Ben
gal
51.4
94
70
2.4
32
4.4
23
40
33
70
.18
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-1 7
80
-97.
57
-22
5.5
83
39
33
7N
A
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est B
enga
l2
50
.00
23
81
.62
38
3 3
35
2 2
50
10
02
50
1 0
00
NA
-2 0
12
-98
.4-2
50
2 3
82
33
5N
A
BO
D –
bio
chem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d; C
OD
– c
hem
ica
l oxy
gen
dem
an
d; N
A –
no
t ava
ilab
le; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
Acc
epta
ble
wa
ter q
ua
lity
A
ccep
tab
le li
mit
D
iffer
ence
Tota
lTo
tal
Tota
l
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Co
nd
uct
ivit
yco
lifo
rms
Volu
me
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
(m
ho
s/B
OD
CO
D(M
PN
/N
itra
tes
Riv
erS
tate
(km
3)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
cm)
(mg/
l)(m
g/l)
10
0 m
l)(m
g/l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India60
Ap
pe
nd
ix 7
Acc
ep
tab
le li
mit
dif
fere
nce
of
dri
nk
ing
wa
ter
ove
r th
e p
eri
od
19
93
–20
03
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0m
l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
5.2
53
19
82
.27
9.1
02
.93
-4.1
3 1
98
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh1
5.9
81
.96
31
9 6
17
1.8
59
.17
.30
.11
21
.99
60
9.7
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh6
.81
2.4
51
0.5
14
91
.86
.70
0.6
53
.81
49
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
72
.71
63
2 1
92
2.3
8.1
00
.47
.93
21
92
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh5
.54
11
.65
94
.28
92
.57
.82
7.6
03
.85
66
.68
92
.5
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
62
.75
15
.57
81
4.9
24
0-2
.15
-8.5
78
1
Tun
gb
ha
dra
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
9.2
62
.15
13
.40
27
.10
0.1
56
.30
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
91
13
.08
57
1 5
65
19
.35
8.4
60
3.7
35
71
55
6.5
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
81
.59
.65
6 4
60
12
.49
.22
16
-10
.90
.38
56
44
4
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
51
.21
91
13
81
.31
9.6
8.3
3-0
.1-0
.61
12
9.6
7
Ga
ng
aB
iha
r4
9.5
01
.67
16
.13
20
81
.02
16
.32
7.8
70
.65
-0.2
23
20
0.1
3
Gh
ag
ha
raB
iha
r2
3.1
51
.41
9.5
2 0
13
1.9
22
6.2
2-0
.5-2
.52
00
6.7
8
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
1.4
18
.72
63
30
.61
0.8
7.9
50
.87
.92
62
5.0
5
Ha
sde
vC
hh
att
isg
arh
13
.11
2.1
26
29
05
.36
6.4
54
.2-3
.2-4
0.4
52
85
.8
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
11
.42
2.8
37
1.6
19
.35
.79
-0.2
3.5
31
.21
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh2
0.9
71
.83
0.3
56
6.3
33
.21
44
.59
-1.4
16
.35
61
.74
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
11
.95
26
.43
36
1.8
27
.65
.85
0.1
5-1
.23
30
.15
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
17
.85
88
5 7
96
66
92
.82
5.7
11
15
32
.38
5 7
96
65
8
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
82
.81
11
55
2.2
5.5
4.6
60
.65
.51
50
.34
Zu
ari
Go
a3
6.2
82
.31
11
63
2.6
5.7
4.7
-0.3
5.3
15
8.3
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
2.8
54
26
0.1
71
.41
6.1
41
.45
25
.95
6.1
7
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
89
58
.83
66
2.4
12
78
3 3
33
41
61
66
41
.02
54
2.8
1 9
98
.41
2 7
83
33
2
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
1.1
41
34
51
.91
3.9
7.6
-0.7
6-0
.93
7.4
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
1.9
87
50
82
.21
8.1
11
.4-0
.3-1
0.1
7 4
96
.6
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
1.2
16
.75
68
.75
31
66
.7-1
.80
.75
62
.05
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
24
02
77
37
5 0
03
.34
11
08
11
-11
69
37
4 9
92
.3
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
20
.61
01
.37
9 3
95
32
4.8
11
.64
17
.67
6.5
79
38
3.3
6
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
91
.93
35
74
3.3
22
8.5
-1.3
7-1
95
65
.5
Gh
ag
ga
rH
ary
an
a2
3.4
39
.37
80
9.6
31
.34
-0.3
46
.7-4
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
01
0.8
37
.68
44
85
2 7
52
1.3
14
.62
.49
.52
3.0
84
4 8
52
75
0
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh2
5.6
01
.36
3.7
93
50
.47
4.2
3.4
0.8
9-0
.59
31
.6
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
46
.00
0.7
85
92
0.2
33
.20
.55
58
8.8
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
10
.09
0.7
52
.54
00
.46
.43
.95
0.3
5-3
.93
6.0
5
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
NA
0.3
77
.71
49
91
.45
.83
3.5
1-1
.03
1.8
84
95
.49
61Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
2.7
33
.44
21
37
.50
00
3.4
42
13
7.5
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Jha
rkh
an
d4
.64
1.8
73
1.7
51
04
22
.96
.38
.5-1
.03
25
.45
1 0
33
.5
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka
13
.11
3.1
60
1 5
52
4.3
38
6.7
-1.1
4-3
81
54
5.3
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
tak
a1
6.7
31
.62
2.6
66
97
91
.44
57
.30
.2-2
2.3
46
97
1.7
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka
8.3
61
.06
21
.62
18
51
24
.26
7.3
80
.06
-2.6
62
17
7.6
2
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka
9.4
61
.75
71
.71
01
91
.65
49
.47
.30
.12
2.3
1 0
11
.7
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka
8.1
61
.12
21
04
61
.12
76
.80
-51
03
9.2
Kri
shn
aK
arn
ata
ka
15
.52
1.6
52
2.8
2 9
67
1.2
42
.37
.30
.45
-19
.52
95
9.7
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
tak
a1
2.5
71
.46
27
.16
1 4
06
1.4
52
7.3
0.0
6-2
4.8
41
39
8.7
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka
16
.73
1.2
23
2 0
91
73
17
.38
-5.8
-82
08
3.6
2
Tun
gb
ha
dra
Ka
rna
tak
a3
.85
2.6
38
1 5
52
1.3
23
.67
.31
.31
4.4
1 5
44
.7
Ac
he
nk
oil
Ke
rala
4.3
11
.92
5.6
5 5
50
0.5
7.5
7.2
11
.41
8.1
5 5
42
.79
Bh
ava
ni
Ke
rala
0.0
00
.33
.28
75
0.4
6.7
7.7
2-0
.1-3
.58
67
.28
Ch
ali
yar
Ke
rala
16
.73
0.4
58
.41
45
00
.45
87
.69
00
.41
44
2.3
1
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
0.6
3.2
82
50
.44
.77
0.2
-1.5
81
8
Ma
nim
ala
Ke
rala
16
.73
0.7
14
.43
06
20
.46
.87
.60
.37
.63
05
4.4
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
31
.12
0.8
14
86
60
.78
.17
.30
.41
2.7
14
85
8.7
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
31
.46
.43
90
5.3
8.3
7.3
-3.9
-1.9
38
2.7
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
2.1
26
92
40
00
2.1
26
92
4
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
2.7
71
1.9
26
36
19
88
.56
06
.01
-5.7
3-4
8.0
86
36
19
2
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
30
01
60
04
7.8
19
5.3
9.8
3-1
7.8
-19
5.3
1 5
90
.17
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.50
4.9
20
06
.86
2.8
9.8
75
-1.9
-42
.8-9
.87
5
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
90
25
42
52
.33
0.3
4.9
1-2
.3-5
.34
20
.09
Ma
nd
ak
ini
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
60
34
52
.84
1.3
4.4
63
.2-4
1.3
34
0.5
4
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
1.8
22
1.4
17
92
.52
25
.3-0
.68
-0.6
17
3.7
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
71
.61
8.7
66
62
.24
43
.8-0
.6-2
5.3
66
2.2
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
1.2
61
7.3
31
26
.66
22
45
.18
-0.7
4-6
.67
12
1.4
8
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
55
.95
04
35
.52
.63
24
.22
3.3
5-3
24
31
.28
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.40
2.2
52
0.5
29
25
.23
8.5
5.4
-2.9
5-1
82
86
.6
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
16
.18
24
27
85
.22
4.8
54
.21
0.9
8-0
.85
27
3.8
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
65
25
45
.12
4.5
4.3
0.9
-19
.52
49
.7
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
8.0
89
32
78
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
3.2
16
7.8
62
73
.57
Kri
shn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
06
.33
42
65
4.8
21
.46
4.2
1.5
12
.54
26
0.8
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
86
.50
22
84
.95
64
.41
.6-5
62
23
.6
Pa
talg
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
NA
5.3
24
21
44
.75
26
.14
.30
.55
-2.1
20
9.7
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
5.9
4.6
62
31
5.3
26
4.2
0.6
-21
.34
22
6.8
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
5.7
32
21
84
.55
22
.44
.21
.15
9.6
21
3.8
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
5.8
32
18
36
.82
4.7
0-1
7.3
18
3
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
85
.20
17
35
.62
64
.43
-0.4
-26
16
8.5
7
Co
nti
nu
ed
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India62
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
rN
A2
.40
60
2.2
4.6
5.9
20
.2-4
.65
4.0
8
Dh
am
siri
Na
ga
lan
d0
.00
4.3
80
00
00
4.3
80
0
Ba
ita
rni
Ori
ssa
17
.73
1.6
60
4 4
37
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
-2.7
-22
.56
4 4
31
.08
Bra
hm
an
iO
riss
a1
2.3
91
74
.23
39
93
.54
14
.45
6.2
51
3.4
6-1
0.2
53
39
2.7
5
I.B
Ori
ssa
8.8
81
.55
03
53
94
.92
3.4
5.5
-3.3
5-2
3.4
3 5
33
.5
Ku
ak
ha
iO
riss
aN
A2
.25
04
77
93
.61
4.6
6.1
5-1
.35
-14
.64
77
2.8
5
Ma
ha
na
di
Ori
ssa
29
.02
1.8
62
45
70
64
.11
95
.8-2
.24
55
70
0.2
Na
ga
vall
iO
riss
a8
.24
2.2
50
7 4
80
00
02
.25
07
48
0
Ru
shik
uly
aO
riss
a1
3.1
11
.80
5 1
50
17
.87
53
.24
-16
-75
5 1
46
.76
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Ori
ssa
1.0
71
.72
33
00
00
01
.72
33
00
Be
as
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
42
.06
6.2
27
83
7.4
16
.74
.5-5
.34
-10
.48
77
8.5
Gh
ag
ha
rP
un
jab
14
.66
12
55
3 6
54
20
39
4-8
16
3 6
50
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
51
2.8
25
2 9
44
0.8
1.9
31
22
3.1
2 9
41
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
4.5
21
2.5
85
07
64
.43
7.4
3.8
50
.09
5.1
85
07
2.1
5
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
1.6
38
.17
73
72
.43
86
.73
-0.7
7-2
9.8
37
30
.27
Ma
hi
Ra
jas
tha
n0
.93
1.7
8.1
91
42
.43
9.4
7.2
2-0
.7-3
1.3
90
6.7
8
Tes
taS
ikk
im2
4.0
08
.55
01
99
00
08
.55
01
99
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
31
.61
3.8
1 2
43
15
.27
43
.51
1.1
-13
.67
-29
.71
23
1.9
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
2.5
81
6.3
81
0.5
-0.4
53
6.9
21
07
2.5
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
31
.82
1.7
25
10
00
1.8
21
.72
51
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
32
.12
71
10
02
.21
7.7
12
.26
-0.1
9.3
1 0
87
.74
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
92
.21
1.9
2 5
42
58
32
.81
5.3
1-0
.6-3
.42
54
2 5
82
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
12
.91
17
.05
21
33
02
.61
15
8.9
20
.32
.05
21
32
1.0
8
Gh
ag
ha
raU
tta
r P
rad
esh
10
8.8
01
.32
1.0
51
12
03
.28
.18
.43
-1.9
12
.95
1 1
11
.57
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
5.0
31
9.7
69
.52
-2.5
3-4
.26
18
78
8.4
8
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
0.0
02
9.8
66
17
63
33
5 6
54
58
13
58
.2-2
8.1
34
41
3 3
35
64
5
Ka
lin
di
Utt
ar
Pra
de
shN
A3
4.9
22
19
1.6
3E
+0
83
.92
7.2
12
.26
31
.02
19
1.8
1.6
3E
+0
8
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
4.7
01
1 2
44
3.9
25
.79
.53
0.8
-25
.71
1 2
34
.47
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
2.2
22
.81
28
37
.30
-0.8
15
.51
28
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
24
22
45
42
.31
38
.3-0
.32
92
44
5.7
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
.00
3.3
16
6 9
75
00
03
.31
66
97
5
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
66
.62
29
.12
40
82
6 4
94
6.6
21
.35
7.9
80
.02
7.7
74
0 8
26
48
6
Ba
rak
er
We
st B
en
ga
l2
50
.00
1.2
07
0 0
00
4.8
23
.30
-3.6
-23
.37
0 0
00
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
ng
al
12
5.8
61
.83
16
.42
52
17
9.6
2.4
23
5.6
11
.39
-0.5
9-1
9.2
25
2 1
68
.2
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
ng
al
51
.49
2.4
32
4.4
23
40
33
71
16
.75
11
.21
.43
7.6
73
40
32
5.8
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
ng
al
25
0.0
01
.60
2 3
83
33
51
.11
8.2
11
.39
0.5
-18
.22
38
3 3
24
BO
D –
bio
che
mic
al o
xyg
en
de
ma
nd
; C
OD
– c
he
mic
al o
xyg
en
de
ma
nd
; N
A –
no
t a
vail
ab
le;
MP
N –
mo
st p
rob
ab
le n
um
be
r
So
urc
eC
om
pil
ed
by
au
tho
rs
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Ap
pe
nd
ix
7Continued
63Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ap
pe
nd
ix 8
Acc
ep
tab
le li
mit
dif
fere
nce
of
irri
ga
tio
n o
ver
the
pe
rio
d 1
99
3–2
00
3
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
-94
.8-2
45
2 1
98
-97
.73
-24
0.9
-1 0
00
2.9
3-4
.13
19
8
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh1
5.9
8-9
8.0
4-2
19
8 6
17
-98
.15
-24
0.9
-99
2.7
0.1
12
1.9
9 6
09
.7
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh6
.81
-97
.55
-23
9.5
-85
1-9
8.2
-24
3.3
-1 0
00
0.6
53
.81
49
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
7-9
7.3
-23
43
1 1
92
-97
.7-2
41
.9-1
00
00
.47
.93
2 1
92
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh5
.54
-88
.35
-15
5.8
-10
7.5
-92
.2-2
22
.4-1
00
03
.85
66
.68
92
.5
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
6-9
7.2
5-2
34
.5-2
19
-95
.1-2
26
-1 0
00
-2.1
5-8
.57
81
Tun
gb
ha
dra
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
9.2
6-9
7.8
5-2
36
.6-1
00
0-9
8-2
42
.9-1
00
00
.15
6.3
0
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
9-9
9-2
36
.92
57
0 5
65
-99
-24
0.6
5-9
91
.54
03
.73
57
1 5
56
.5
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
8-9
8.5
-24
0.4
55
46
0-8
7.6
-24
0.7
8-9
84
-10
.90
.38
56
44
4
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
5-9
8.8
-23
11
38
-98
.7-2
30
.4-9
91
.67
-0.1
-0.6
1 1
29
.67
Ga
ng
aB
iha
r4
9.5
0-9
8.3
3-2
33
.92
20
8-9
8.9
8-2
33
.68
-99
2.1
30
.65
-0.2
23
20
0.1
3
Gh
ag
ha
raB
iha
r2
3.1
5-9
8.6
-23
0.5
1 0
13
-98
.1-2
28
-99
3.7
8-0
.5-2
.52
00
6.7
8
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
-98
.6-2
31
.31
63
3-9
9.4
-23
9.2
-99
2.0
50
.87
.92
62
5.0
5
Ha
sde
vC
hh
att
isg
arh
13
.11
-97
.9-2
24
-71
0-9
4.7
-18
3.5
5-9
95
.8-3
.2-4
0.4
52
85
.8
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
1-9
8.6
-22
7.2
-96
3-9
8.4
-23
0.7
-99
4.2
1-0
.23
.53
1.2
1
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh2
0.9
7-9
8.2
-21
9.6
5-9
33
.67
-96
.8-2
36
-99
5.4
1-1
.41
6.3
56
1.7
4
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
1-9
8.0
5-2
23
.6-6
64
-98
.2-2
22
.4-9
94
.15
0.1
5-1
.23
30
.15
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
-82
.2-1
92
85
79
5 6
69
-97
.2-2
24
.3-9
89
15
32
.38
5 7
96
65
8
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
8-9
7.2
-23
9-8
45
-97
.8-2
44
.5-9
95
.34
0.6
5.5
15
0.3
4
Zu
ari
Go
a3
6.2
8-9
7.7
-23
9-8
37
-97
.4-2
44
.3-9
95
.3-0
.35
.31
58
.3
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
-97
.15
-20
8-9
39
.83
-98
.6-2
33
.9-9
96
1.4
52
5.9
56
.17
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
88
58
.83
41
2.4
12
78
2 3
33
31
61
41
4-9
98
.98
54
2.8
1 9
98
.41
2 7
83
33
2
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
-98
.86
-23
7-9
55
-98
.1-2
36
.1-9
92
.4-0
.76
-0.9
37
.4
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
-98
.1-2
42
6 5
08
-97
.8-2
31
.9-9
88
.6-0
.3-1
0.1
7 4
96
.6
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
-98
.8-2
33
.25
-93
1.2
5-9
7-2
34
-99
3.3
-1.8
0.7
56
2.0
5
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
2-6
02
73
74
00
3.3
-59
-14
2-9
89
-11
69
37
4 9
92
.3
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
-79
.4-1
48
.77
8 3
95
-97
-22
5.2
-98
8.3
61
7.6
76
.57
9 3
83
.36
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
9-9
8.0
7-2
47
-42
6-9
6.7
-22
8-9
91
.5-1
.37
-19
56
5.5
Gh
ag
ga
rH
ary
an
a2
3.4
3-9
0.7
-17
2-1
00
0-9
0.4
-21
8.7
-99
6-0
.34
6.7
-4
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
0-8
9.2
-21
2.3
24
4 8
51
75
2-9
8.7
-23
5.4
-99
7.6
9.5
23
.08
44
85
2 7
50
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh2
5.6
0-9
8.6
4-2
46
.3-6
5-9
9.5
3-2
45
.8-9
96
.60
.89
-0.5
93
1.6
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
46
.00
-99
.3-2
42
-40
8-9
9.8
-24
7-9
96
.80
.55
58
8.8
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
10
.09
-99
.25
-24
7.5
-96
0-9
9.6
-24
3.6
-99
6.0
50
.35
-3.9
36
.05
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
NA
-99
.63
-24
2.2
9-5
01
-98
.6-2
44
.17
-99
6.4
9-1
.03
1.8
84
95
.49
Co
nti
nu
ed
Accounting for freshwater quality in India64
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
2.7
3-9
6.6
-20
8-8
62
.5-1
00
-25
0-1
00
03
.44
21
37
.5
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Jha
rkh
an
d4
.64
-98
.13
-21
8.2
54
2-9
7.1
-24
3.7
-99
1.5
-1.0
32
5.4
51
03
3.5
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka
13
.11
-96
.84
-25
05
52
-95
.7-2
12
-99
3.3
-1.1
4-3
81
54
5.3
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
tak
a1
6.7
3-9
8.4
-22
7.3
45
97
9-9
8.6
-20
5-9
92
.70
.2-2
2.3
46
97
1.7
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka
8.3
6-9
8.9
4-2
28
.41
18
5-9
9-2
25
.74
-99
2.6
20
.06
-2.6
62
17
7.6
2
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka
9.4
6-9
8.2
5-1
78
.31
9-9
8.3
5-2
00
.6-9
92
.70
.12
2.3
1 0
11
.7
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka
8.1
6-9
8.9
-22
84
6-9
8.9
-22
3-9
93
.20
-51
03
9.2
Kri
shn
aK
arn
ata
ka
15
.52
-98
.35
-22
7.2
1 9
67
-98
.8-2
07
.7-9
92
.70
.45
-19
.52
95
9.7
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
tak
a1
2.5
7-9
8.5
4-2
22
.84
40
6-9
8.6
-19
8-9
92
.70
.06
-24
.84
1 3
98
.7
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka
16
.73
-98
.8-2
27
1 0
91
-93
-21
9-9
92
.62
-5.8
-82
08
3.6
2
Tun
gb
ha
dra
Ka
rna
tak
a3
.85
-97
.4-2
12
55
2-9
8.7
-22
6.4
-99
2.7
1.3
14
.41
54
4.7
Ac
he
nk
oil
Ke
rala
4.3
1-9
8.1
-22
4.4
4 5
50
-99
.5-2
42
.5-9
92
.79
1.4
18
.15
54
2.7
9
Bh
ava
ni
Ke
rala
0.0
0-9
9.7
-24
6.8
-12
5-9
96
-24
3.3
-99
2.2
8-0
.1-3
.58
67
.28
Ch
ali
yar
Ke
rala
16
.73
-99
.55
-24
1.6
45
0-9
9.5
5-2
42
-99
2.3
10
0.4
1 4
42
.31
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
-99
.4-2
46
.8-1
75
-99
.6-2
45
.3-9
93
0.2
-1.5
81
8
Ma
nim
ala
Ke
rala
16
.73
-99
.3-2
35
.62
06
2-9
9.6
-24
3.2
-99
2.4
0.3
7.6
3 0
54
.4
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
3-9
8.9
-22
9.2
13
86
6-9
9.3
-24
1.9
-99
2.7
0.4
12
.71
4 8
58
.7
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
3-9
8.6
-24
3.6
-61
0-9
4.7
-24
1.7
-99
2.7
-3.9
-1.9
38
2.7
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
-97
.9-2
24
-76
-10
0-2
50
-1 0
00
2.1
26
92
4
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
-97
.23
-23
8.0
86
35
19
8-9
1.5
-19
0-9
93
.99
-5.7
3-4
8.0
86
36
19
2
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
-70
-25
06
00
-52
.2-5
4.7
-99
0.1
7-1
7.8
-19
5.3
1 5
90
.17
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.50
-95
.1-2
30
-1 0
00
-93
.2-1
87
.2-9
90
.12
5-1
.9-4
2.8
-9.8
75
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
9-1
00
-22
5-5
75
-97
.7-2
19
.7-9
95
.09
-2.3
-5.3
42
0.0
9
Ma
nd
ak
ini
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
-94
-25
0-6
55
-97
.2-2
08
.7-9
95
.54
3.2
-41
.33
40
.54
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
-98
.18
-22
8.6
-82
1-9
7.5
-22
8-9
94
.7-0
.68
-0.6
17
3.7
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
7-9
8.4
-23
1.3
-33
4-9
7.8
-20
6-9
96
.2-0
.6-2
5.3
66
2.2
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
-98
.74
-23
2.6
7-8
73
.34
-98
-22
6-9
94
.82
-0.7
4-6
.67
12
1.4
8
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
5-9
4.0
5-2
50
-56
4.5
-97
.4-2
18
-99
5.7
83
.35
-32
43
1.2
8
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.40
-97
.75
-22
9.5
-70
8-9
4.8
-21
1.5
-99
4.6
-2.9
5-1
82
86
.6
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
-83
.82
-22
6-7
22
-94
.8-2
25
.15
-99
5.8
10
.98
-0.8
52
73
.8
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
-94
-24
5-7
46
-94
.9-2
25
.5-9
95
.70
.9-1
9.5
24
9.7
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
-91
.92
-15
7-7
22
-95
.13
-22
4.8
6-9
95
.57
3.2
16
7.8
62
73
.57
Kri
shn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
0-9
3.7
-21
6-7
35
-95
.2-2
28
.54
-99
5.8
1.5
12
.54
26
0.8
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
8-9
3.5
-25
0-7
72
-95
.1-1
94
-99
5.6
1.6
-56
22
3.6
Pa
talg
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
NA
-94
.7-2
26
-78
6-9
5.2
5-2
23
.9-9
95
.70
.55
-2.1
20
9.7
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
-94
.1-2
45
.34
-76
9-9
4.7
-22
4-9
95
.80
.6-2
1.3
42
26
.8
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
-94
.3-2
18
-78
2-9
5.4
5-2
27
.6-9
95
.81
.15
9.6
21
3.8
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
-94
.2-2
18
-81
7-9
3.2
-22
5.3
-1 0
00
-17
.31
83
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
8-9
4.8
-25
0-8
27
-94
.4-2
24
-99
5.5
7-0
.4-2
61
68
.57
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Ap
pe
nd
ix
8Continued
65Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
rN
A-9
7.6
-25
0-9
40
-97
.8-2
45
.4-9
94
.08
0.2
-4.6
54
.08
Dh
am
siri
Na
ga
lan
d0
.00
-95
.62
-25
0-1
00
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
04
.38
00
Ba
ita
rni
Ori
ssa
17
.73
-98
.34
-25
03
43
7-9
5.6
4-2
27
.44
-99
4.0
8-2
.7-2
2.5
64
43
1.0
8
Bra
hm
an
iO
riss
a1
2.3
9-8
3-2
45
.82
39
9-9
6.4
6-2
35
.55
-99
3.7
51
3.4
6-1
0.2
53
39
2.7
5
I.B
Ori
ssa
8.8
8-9
8.4
5-2
50
2 5
39
-95
.1-2
26
.6-9
94
.5-3
.35
-23
.43
53
3.5
Ku
ak
ha
iO
riss
aN
A-9
7.7
5-2
50
3 7
79
-96
.4-2
35
.4-9
93
.85
-1.3
5-1
4.6
4 7
72
.85
Ma
ha
na
di
Ori
ssa
29
.02
-98
.14
-22
64
70
6-9
5.9
-23
1-9
94
.2-2
.24
55
70
0.2
Na
ga
vall
iO
riss
a8
.24
-97
.75
-25
06
48
0-1
00
-25
0-1
00
02
.25
07
48
0
Ru
shik
uly
aO
riss
a1
3.1
1-9
8.2
-25
04
15
0-8
2.2
-17
5-9
96
.76
-16
-75
5 1
46
.76
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Ori
ssa
1.0
7-9
8.3
20
80
-1 0
00
-10
0-2
50
-1 0
00
1.7
23
30
0
Be
an
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
4-9
7.9
4-2
43
.78
-21
7-9
2.6
-23
3.3
-99
5.5
-5.3
4-1
0.4
87
78
.5
Gh
ag
ga
rP
un
jab
14
.66
-68
-15
62
65
8-8
0-2
11
-99
61
25
53
65
4
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
5-8
7.2
-22
51
94
4-9
9.2
-24
8.1
-99
71
22
3.1
2 9
41
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
-95
.48
-23
7.4
24
07
6-9
5.5
7-2
42
.6-9
96
.15
0.0
95
.18
5 0
72
.15
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
-98
.37
-24
1.8
3-2
63
-97
.6-2
12
-99
3.2
7-0
.77
-29
.83
73
0.2
7
Ma
hi
Ra
jas
tha
n0
.93
-98
.3-2
41
.9-8
6-9
7.6
-21
0.6
-99
2.7
8-0
.7-3
1.3
90
6.7
8
Tes
taS
ikk
im2
4.0
0-9
1.4
5-2
50
-80
1-1
00
-25
0-1
00
08
.55
01
99
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
3-9
8.4
-23
6.2
24
3-8
4.7
3-2
06
.5-9
88
.9-1
3.6
7-2
9.7
1 2
31
.9
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
-97
.87
-19
6.7
83
-97
.42
-23
3.6
2-9
89
.5-0
.45
36
.92
1 0
72
.5
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
3-9
8.2
-22
8.3
-74
9-1
00
-25
0-1
00
01
.82
1.7
25
1
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
3-9
7.9
-22
31
00
-97
.8-2
32
.3-9
87
.74
-0.1
9.3
1 0
87
.74
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
9-9
7.8
-23
8.1
2 5
41
58
3-9
7.2
-23
4.7
-99
9-0
.6-3
.42
54
2 5
82
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
1-9
7.0
9-2
32
.95
20
33
0-9
7.3
9-2
35
-99
1.0
80
.32
.05
21
32
1.0
8
Gh
ag
ha
raU
tta
r P
rad
esh
10
8.8
0-9
8.7
-22
8.9
51
20
-96
.8-2
41
.9-9
91
.57
-1.9
12
.95
1 1
11
.57
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
-97
.5-2
34
.51
7 7
98
-94
.97
-23
0.2
4-9
90
.48
-2.5
3-4
.26
18
78
8.4
8
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
0.0
0-7
0.1
34
-74
3 3
34
65
4-4
2-1
15
-99
1.8
-28
.13
44
13
33
5 6
45
Ka
lin
di
Utt
ar
Pra
de
shN
A-6
5.0
8-3
11
.63
E+
08
-96
.1-2
22
.8-9
87
.74
31
.02
19
1.8
1.6
3E
+0
8
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
-95
.3-2
50
10
24
4-9
6.1
-22
4.3
-99
0.4
70
.8-2
5.7
11
23
4.4
7
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
.00
-97
.8-2
27
.2-8
72
-97
-24
2.7
-1 0
00
-0.8
15
.51
28
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
-98
-20
81
45
4-9
7.7
-23
7-9
91
.7-0
.32
92
44
5.7
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
.00
-96
.7-2
34
5 9
75
-10
0-2
50
-1 0
00
3.3
16
6 9
75
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
6-9
3.3
8-2
20
.88
40
82
5 4
94
-93
.4-2
28
.65
-99
2.0
20
.02
7.7
74
0 8
26
48
6
Ba
rak
er
We
st B
en
ga
l2
50
.00
-98
.8-2
50
69
00
0-9
5.2
-22
6.7
-1 0
00
-3.6
-23
.37
0 0
00
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
ng
al
12
5.8
6-9
8.1
7-2
33
.62
51
17
9.6
-97
.58
-21
4.4
-98
8.6
1-0
.59
-19
.22
52
16
8.2
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
ng
al
51
.49
-97
.57
-22
5.5
83
39
33
7-9
9-2
33
.25
-98
8.8
1.4
37
.67
34
0 3
25
.8
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
ng
al
25
0.0
0-9
8.4
-25
02
38
2 3
35
-98
.9-2
31
.8-9
88
.61
0.5
-18
.22
38
3 3
24
BO
D –
bio
che
mic
al o
xyg
en
de
ma
nd
; C
OD
– c
he
mic
al o
xyg
en
de
ma
nd
; N
A –
no
t a
vail
ab
le;
MP
N –
mo
st p
rob
ab
le n
um
be
r
So
urc
eC
om
pil
ed
by
au
tho
rs
20
03
19
93
20
03
– 1
99
3
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India66
Ap
pe
nd
ix 9
Ch
an
ge
of
wa
ter
qu
ali
ty b
y st
ate
(b
y ri
ver)
fro
m a
cce
pta
ble
lim
it o
ver
19
93
–20
03
D
iffe
ren
ce
20
03
(a
ctu
al -
ac
ce
pta
ble
)
Dif
fere
nc
e 1
99
3 (
ac
tua
l - a
cc
ep
tab
le)
D
iffe
ren
ce
(2
00
3 -
19
93
)
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Go
da
vari
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
40
.16
5.2
53
19
82
.27
9.1
02
.93
-4.1
3 1
98
Kri
shn
aA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh1
5.9
81
.96
31
9 6
17
1.8
59
.17
.30
.11
21
.99
60
9.7
Ma
ne
rA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh6
.81
2.4
51
0.5
14
91
.86
.70
0.6
53
.81
49
Ma
nje
era
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
4.8
72
.71
63
2 1
92
2.3
8.1
00
.47
.93
2 1
92
Mu
siA
nd
hra
Pra
de
sh5
.54
11
.65
94
.28
92
.57
.82
7.6
03
.85
66
.68
92
.5
Pe
nn
er
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
6.1
62
.75
15
.57
81
4.9
24
0-2
.15
-8.5
78
1
Tun
gb
ha
dra
An
dh
ra P
rad
esh
9.2
62
.15
13
.40
27
.10
0.1
56
.30
Bra
hm
ap
utr
aA
ssa
m1
8.2
91
13
.08
57
1 5
65
19
.35
8.4
60
3.7
35
71
55
6.5
Dh
an
sari
Ass
am
6.7
81
.59
.65
6 4
60
12
.49
.22
16
-10
.90
.38
56
44
4
Ga
nd
ak
Bih
ar
11
9.0
51
.21
91
13
81
.31
9.6
8.3
3-0
.1-0
.61
12
9.6
7
Ga
ng
aB
iha
r4
9.5
1.6
71
6.1
3 2
08
1.0
21
6.3
27
.87
0.6
5-0
.22
3 2
00
.13
Gh
ag
ha
raB
iha
r2
3.1
51
.41
9.5
2 0
13
1.9
22
6.2
2-0
.5-2
.52
00
6.7
8
So
ne
Bih
ar
64
.13
1.4
18
.72
63
30
.61
0.8
7.9
50
.87
.92
62
5.0
5
Ha
sde
vC
hh
att
isg
arh
13
.11
2.1
26
29
05
.36
6.4
54
.2-3
.2-4
0.4
52
85
.8
Kh
aro
on
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
11
.42
2.8
37
1.6
19
.35
.79
-0.2
3.5
31
.21
Ma
ha
na
di
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh2
0.9
71
.83
0.3
56
6.3
33
.21
44
.59
-1.4
16
.35
61
.74
Se
on
ath
Ch
ha
ttis
ga
rh1
3.1
11
.95
26
.43
36
1.8
27
.65
.85
0.1
5-1
.23
30
.15
Yam
un
aD
elh
i8
.72
17
.85
88
5 7
96
66
92
.82
5.7
11
15
32
.38
5 7
96
65
8
Ma
nd
ovi
Go
a3
6.2
82
.81
11
55
2.2
5.5
4.6
60
.65
.51
50
.34
Zu
ari
Go
a3
6.2
82
.31
11
63
2.6
5.7
4.7
-0.3
5.3
15
8.3
Da
ma
ng
an
ga
Gu
jara
t3
.43
2.8
54
26
0.1
71
.41
6.1
41
.45
25
.95
6.1
7
Kh
ari
Gu
jara
t1
4.9
89
58
.83
66
2.4
12
78
3 3
33
41
61
66
41
.02
54
2.8
1 9
98
.41
2 7
83
33
2
Ma
hi
Gu
jara
t1
.29
1.1
41
34
51
.91
3.9
7.6
-0.7
6-0
.93
7.4
Me
shw
aG
uja
rat
13
.34
1.9
87
50
82
.21
8.1
11
.4-0
.3-1
0.1
7 4
96
.6
Na
rma
da
Gu
jara
t4
.69
1.2
16
.75
68
.75
31
66
.7-1
.80
.75
62
.05
Sa
ba
rma
tiG
uja
rat
1.7
24
02
77
37
5 0
03
.34
11
08
11
-11
69
37
4 9
92
.3
Sh
ed
iG
uja
rat
14
.98
20
.61
01
.37
9 3
95
32
4.8
11
.64
17
.67
6.5
79
38
3.3
6
Tap
iG
uja
rat
4.2
91
.93
35
74
3.3
22
8.5
-1.3
7-1
95
65
.5
Gh
ag
ga
rH
ary
an
a2
3.4
39
.37
80
9.6
31
.34
-0.3
46
.7-4
Yam
un
aH
ary
an
a2
9.8
10
.83
7.6
84
4 8
52
75
21
.31
4.6
2.4
9.5
23
.08
44
85
2 7
50
Be
an
Him
ach
al
Pra
de
sh2
5.6
1.3
63
.79
35
0.4
74
.23
.40
.89
-0.5
93
1.6
Pa
rva
tiH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
46
0.7
85
92
0.2
33
.20
.55
58
8.8
Ra
viH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
10
.09
0.7
52
.54
00
.46
.43
.95
0.3
5-3
.93
6.0
5
Sa
tlu
jH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
NA
0.3
77
.71
49
91
.45
.83
3.5
1-1
.03
1.8
84
95
.49
Yam
un
aH
ima
cha
l P
rad
esh
2.7
33
.44
21
37
.50
00
3.4
42
13
7.5
67Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Co
nti
nu
ed
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Jha
rkh
an
d4
.64
1.8
73
1.7
51
04
22
.96
.38
.5-1
.03
25
.45
1 0
33
.5
Bh
ad
raK
arn
ata
ka
13
.11
3.1
60
1 5
52
4.3
38
6.7
-1.1
4-3
81
54
5.3
Bh
ima
Ka
rna
tak
a1
6.7
31
.62
2.6
66
97
91
.44
57
.30
.2-2
2.3
46
97
1.7
Ca
uve
ryK
arn
ata
ka
8.3
61
.06
21
.62
18
51
24
.26
7.3
80
.06
-2.6
62
17
7.6
2
Gh
at
Pra
bh
aK
arn
ata
ka
9.4
61
.75
71
.71
01
91
.65
49
.47
.30
.12
2.3
1 0
11
.7
Ka
bb
an
iK
arn
ata
ka
8.1
61
.12
21
04
61
.12
76
.80
-51
03
9.2
Kri
shn
aK
arn
ata
ka
15
.52
1.6
52
2.8
2 9
67
1.2
42
.37
.30
.45
-19
.52
95
9.7
Ma
l P
rab
ha
Ka
rna
tak
a1
2.5
71
.46
27
.16
1 4
06
1.4
52
7.3
0.0
6-2
4.8
41
39
8.7
Sh
imsh
aK
arn
ata
ka
16
.73
1.2
23
2 0
91
73
17
.38
-5.8
-82
08
3.6
2
Tun
gb
ha
dra
Ka
rna
tak
a3
.85
2.6
38
1 5
52
1.3
23
.67
.31
.31
4.4
1 5
44
.7
Ac
he
nk
oil
Ke
rala
4.3
11
.92
5.6
5 5
50
0.5
7.5
7.2
11
.41
8.1
5 5
42
.79
Bh
ava
ni
Ke
rala
00
.33
.28
75
0.4
6.7
7.7
2-0
.1-3
.58
67
.28
Ch
ali
yar
Ke
rala
16
.73
0.4
58
.41
45
00
.45
87
.69
00
.41
44
2.3
1
Ka
bb
an
iK
era
la8
.57
0.6
3.2
82
50
.44
.77
0.2
-1.5
81
8
Ma
nim
ala
Ke
rala
16
.73
0.7
14
.43
06
20
.46
.87
.60
.37
.63
05
4.4
Pa
mb
aK
era
la1
6.7
31
.12
0.8
14
86
60
.78
.17
.30
.41
2.7
14
85
8.7
Pe
riya
rK
era
la1
6.7
31
.46
.43
90
5.3
8.3
7.3
-3.9
-1.9
38
2.7
Be
twa
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
13
.57
2.1
26
92
40
00
2.1
26
92
4
Ch
am
ba
lM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh9
.56
2.7
71
1.9
26
36
19
88
.56
06
.01
-5.7
3-4
8.0
86
36
19
2
Kh
an
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
30
01
60
04
7.8
19
5.3
9.8
3-1
7.8
-19
5.3
1 5
90
.17
Ksh
ipra
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
34
.54
.92
00
6.8
62
.89
.87
5-1
.9-4
2.8
-9.8
75
Ma
hi
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
0.8
90
25
42
52
.33
0.3
4.9
1-2
.3-5
.34
20
.09
Ma
nd
ak
ini
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
NA
60
34
52
.84
1.3
4.4
63
.2-4
1.3
34
0.5
4
Na
rma
da
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
28
.89
1.8
22
1.4
17
92
.52
25
.3-0
.68
-0.6
17
3.7
So
ne
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
18
5.8
71
.61
8.7
66
62
.24
43
.8-0
.6-2
5.3
66
2.2
Tap
iM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh5
.11
1.2
61
7.3
31
26
.66
22
45
.18
-0.7
4-6
.67
12
1.4
8
Ton
sM
ad
hya
Pra
de
sh2
6.8
55
.95
04
35
.52
.63
24
.22
3.3
5-3
24
31
.28
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
dh
ya P
rad
esh
26
.42
.25
20
.52
92
5.2
38
.55
.4-2
.95
-18
28
6.6
Bh
ima
Ma
ha
rash
tra
30
.55
16
.18
24
27
85
.22
4.8
54
.21
0.9
8-0
.85
27
3.8
Gir
na
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
65
25
45
.12
4.5
4.3
0.9
-19
.52
49
.7
Go
da
vari
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.14
8.0
89
32
78
4.8
72
5.1
44
.43
3.2
16
7.8
62
73
.57
Kri
shn
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a2
6.5
6.3
34
26
54
.82
1.4
64
.21
.51
2.5
42
60
.8
Nir
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
86
.50
22
84
.95
64
.41
.6-5
62
23
.6
Pa
talg
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
NA
5.3
24
21
44
.75
26
.14
.30
.55
-2.1
20
9.7
Tap
iM
ah
ara
shtr
a5
.11
5.9
4.6
62
31
5.3
26
4.2
0.6
-21
.34
22
6.8
Ulh
as
Ma
ha
rash
tra
36
.28
5.7
32
21
84
.55
22
.44
.21
.15
9.6
21
3.8
Wa
ing
an
ga
Ma
ha
rash
tra
15
.37
5.8
32
18
36
.82
4.7
0-1
7.3
18
3
Wa
rdh
aM
ah
ara
shtr
a3
6.2
85
.20
17
35
.62
64
.43
-0.4
-26
16
8.5
7
Imp
ha
lM
an
ipu
rN
A2
.40
60
2.2
4.6
5.9
20
.2-4
.65
4.0
8
D
iffe
ren
ce
20
03
(a
ctu
al -
ac
ce
pta
ble
)
Dif
fere
nc
e 1
99
3 (
ac
tua
l - a
cc
ep
tab
le)
D
iffe
ren
ce
(2
00
3 -
19
93
)
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Accounting for freshwater quality in India68
Dh
am
siri
Na
ga
lan
d0
4.3
80
00
00
4.3
80
0
Ba
ita
rni
Ori
ssa
17
.73
1.6
60
4 4
37
4.3
62
2.5
65
.92
-2.7
-22
.56
4 4
31
.08
Bra
hm
an
iO
riss
a1
2.3
91
74
.23
39
93
.54
14
.45
6.2
51
3.4
6-1
0.2
53
39
2.7
5
I.B
Ori
ssa
8.8
81
.55
03
53
94
.92
3.4
5.5
-3.3
5-2
3.4
3 5
33
.5
Ku
ak
ha
iO
riss
aN
A2
.25
04
77
93
.61
4.6
6.1
5-1
.35
-14
.64
77
2.8
5
Ma
ha
na
di
Ori
ssa
29
.02
1.8
62
45
70
64
.11
95
.8-2
.24
55
70
0.2
Na
ga
vall
iO
riss
a8
.24
2.2
50
7 4
80
00
02
.25
07
48
0
Ru
shik
uly
aO
riss
a1
3.1
11
.80
5 1
50
17
.87
53
.24
-16
-75
5 1
46
.76
Su
ba
rna
rek
ha
Ori
ssa
1.0
71
.72
33
00
00
01
.72
33
00
Be
an
Pu
nja
b2
0.9
42
.06
6.2
27
83
7.4
16
.74
.5-5
.34
-10
.48
77
8.5
Gh
ag
ga
rP
un
jab
14
.66
12
55
3 6
54
20
39
4-8
16
3 6
50
Ra
viP
un
jab
5.0
51
2.8
25
2 9
44
0.8
1.9
31
22
3.1
2 9
41
Sa
tlu
jP
un
jab
NA
4.5
21
2.5
85
07
64
.43
7.4
3.8
50
.09
5.1
85
07
2.1
5
Ch
am
ba
lR
aja
sth
an
19
.85
1.6
38
.17
73
72
.43
86
.73
-0.7
7-2
9.8
37
30
.27
Ma
hi
Ra
jas
tha
n0
.93
1.7
8.1
91
42
.43
9.4
7.2
2-0
.7-3
1.3
90
6.7
8
Tes
taS
ikk
im2
48
.55
01
99
00
08
.55
01
99
Bh
ava
ni
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
31
.61
3.8
1 2
43
15
.27
43
.51
1.1
-13
.67
-29
.71
23
1.9
Ca
uve
ryTa
mil
Na
du
10
.64
2.1
35
3.3
1 0
83
2.5
81
6.3
81
0.5
-0.4
53
6.9
21
07
2.5
Tam
bir
ap
ara
mi
Tam
il N
ad
u1
6.7
31
.82
1.7
25
10
00
1.8
21
.72
51
Be
twa
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
0.9
32
.12
71
10
02
.21
7.7
12
.26
-0.1
9.3
1 0
87
.74
Ch
am
ba
lU
tta
r P
rad
esh
5.0
92
.21
1.9
2 5
42
58
32
.81
5.3
1-0
.6-3
.42
54
2 5
82
Ga
ng
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
14
9.0
12
.91
17
.05
21
33
02
.61
15
8.9
20
.32
.05
21
32
1.0
8
Gh
ag
ha
raU
tta
r P
rad
esh
10
8.8
1.3
21
.05
1 1
20
3.2
8.1
8.4
3-1
.91
2.9
51
11
1.5
7
Go
mti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
2.5
15
.51
8 7
98
5.0
31
9.7
69
.52
-2.5
3-4
.26
18
78
8.4
8
Hin
do
nU
tta
r P
rad
esh
25
02
9.8
66
17
63
33
5 6
54
58
13
58
.2-2
8.1
34
41
3 3
35
64
6
Ka
lin
di
Utt
ar
Pra
de
shN
A3
4.9
22
19
1.6
3E
+0
83
.92
7.2
12
.26
31
.02
19
1.8
1.6
3E
+0
8
Ra
mg
an
ga
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
51
.33
4.7
01
1 2
44
3.9
25
.79
.53
0.8
-25
.71
1 2
34
.47
Ra
pti
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh2
50
2.2
22
.81
28
37
.30
-0.8
15
.51
28
Rih
an
dU
tta
r P
rad
esh
93
.75
24
22
45
42
.31
38
.3-0
.32
92
44
5.7
Sa
rju
Utt
ar
Pra
de
sh1
95
3.3
16
6 9
75
00
03
.31
66
97
5
Yam
un
aU
tta
r P
rad
esh
20
8.7
66
.62
29
.12
40
82
6 4
94
6.6
21
.35
7.9
80
.02
7.7
74
0 8
26
48
6
Ba
rak
er
We
st B
en
ga
l2
50
1.2
07
0 0
00
4.8
23
.30
-3.6
-23
.37
0 0
00
Da
mo
da
rW
est
Be
ng
al
12
5.8
61
.83
16
.42
52
17
9.6
2.4
23
5.6
11
.39
-0.5
9-1
9.2
25
2 1
68
.2
Ga
ng
aW
est
Be
ng
al
51
.49
2.4
32
4.4
23
40
33
71
16
.75
11
.21
.43
7.6
73
40
32
5.8
Ro
op
na
raya
mW
est
Be
ng
al
25
01
.60
2 3
83
33
51
.11
8.2
11
.39
0.5
-18
.22
38
3 3
24
BO
D –
bio
ch
em
ica
l oxy
ge
n d
em
an
d;
CO
D –
ch
em
ica
l oxy
ge
n d
em
an
d;
NA
– n
ot
ava
ila
ble
; M
PN
– m
ost
pro
ba
ble
nu
mb
er
So
urc
eC
om
pile
d b
y a
uth
ors
D
iffe
ren
ce
20
03
(a
ctu
al -
ac
ce
pta
ble
)
Dif
fere
nc
e 1
99
3 (
ac
tua
l - a
cc
ep
tab
le)
D
iffe
ren
ce
(2
00
3 -
19
93
)
Vo
lum
eB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
BO
DC
OD
Tota
l c
oli
form
sB
OD
CO
DTo
tal
co
lifo
rms
Riv
er
Sta
te(k
m3)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)(m
g/
l)(m
g/
l)(M
PN
/1
00
ml)
(mg
/l)
(mg
/l)
(MP
N/
10
0 m
l)
Ap
pe
nd
ix
9Continued
69Accounting for freshwater quality in India
Ghaziabad
Item USAB ASP TF OP
1a) Unit land requirement (acre/mld) 0.42 0.5 0.5 2.5
1b) Actual requirement (acre) 23.52 28 28 140
1c) Land cost @ Rs 13.10 (lakh per acre) 308.11 366.8 366.8 1834
1d) Land cost per m3 treated Rs lakh 1.50E-05 1.79E-05 1.79E-05 8.97E-05
2a) Unit cost of plant (Rs lakh/MLD) 24.44 29.5 28.5 7
2b) Unit cost of Plant (Rs lakh/m3) 6.78E-05 8.08E-05 7.80E-05 1.48E-05
2c) Cost of plant (Rs lakh) 1 386.64 1 652 1 596 302
3a) Unit O&M (operation and maintenance) 0.51 1 0.75 0.4
cost/MLD/year (Rs lakh)
3b) Unit O&M cost/m3/year (Rs lakh) 1.40E-06 2.82E-06 2.05E-06 1.10E-06
3c) O&M cost/year (Rs lakh) 28.56 57.68 42 22.4
3di) Resource recovery per 0.4 0.3 0.25 0.1
MLD/year (Rs lakh)
3dii) Resource recovery per m3/year
(Rs lakh)
3diii) Per year (Rs lakh)
3ei) Net O&M per MLD/year (Rs lakh) 0.11 0.73 0.5 0.3
3eii) Per m3 per year (Rs lakh) 3.01E-07 0.00 0.00 8.22E-07
3eiii) Per year (Rs lakh) 6.16 40.88 28 16.8
4) Capitalized O&M cost for
20 years @ 12%
4a) Rs lakh/MLD 0.82 5.45 3.74 2.24
4b) Rs lakh /m3 2.25E-06 1.495E-05 1.025E-05 6.14E-06
4c) Total O&M in 20 years (Rs lakh) 45.92 305.2 209.44 125.5
Total cost of project (Rs lakh)
5a) With resource recovery 1 740.67 2 324 2 172.24 2 261.5
5ai) Total cost with resource 8.52 11.37 10.63 11.06
recovery/m3 (Rs)
5b) Without resource recovery
5bi) Total cost wihout resource
recovery/m3
Assuming costs spread over 20 years
Land cost (Rs lakh) 15.41 18.34 18.34 91.7
Plant cost (Rs lakh) 69.33 82.6 79.8 15.1
O&M Rs (lakh) 45.92 305.2 209.44 125.5
New total over 20 years resource
recovery/m3 (Rs) 0.64 1.99 1.50 1.14
MLD – million litres per day; O&M – operation and maintenance; UASB – upflow anaerobic sludge blanket;
ASP – activated sludge process; TF – trickling filter; OP – oxidation pond; m3 – cubic metre
Source CPCB (2004 b)
Appendix 10
Cost of treatment for
representative
plants
Treatment plant costs: Both plants treat 56 million litres of water per day
This is equal to 20 440 000 m3 per year. Details of the Ghaziabad plant’scost of treatment is given below.
Accounting for freshwater quality in India70
Appendix 11
Concentration of metals in influent Concentration of metals in effluent
Name of plant Cd Cr Cu Fe Ni Pb Zn Total Hg Cd Cr Cu Fe Ni Pb Zn Total Hg
Najafgarh 0.01 NT NT 3.22 NT NT 0.15 NT NT NT NT 0.35 NT NT NT NT
Papankala 0.01 NT NT 0.24 NT NT 0.05 ND NT NT NT NT NT NT NT ND
Delhi Gate NT 17 0.45 3.46 0.01 NT 0.65 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.76 NT NT 0.06 NT
Dr Sen NH 0.01 NT 0.04 2.56 NT NT 0.28 NT NT NT NT 0.28 NT NT 0.03 NT
Nilothi NT 0.27 0.11 7.1 0.04 NT 0.63 NT NT NT NT 0.24 NT NT 0.05 NT
Cor. Pillar 0.01 NT 0.29 0.91 NT NT 0.08 ND NT NT 0.86 0.38 NT 0.02 0.01 ND
Cor. Pillar NT 7.6 2.53 79.9 0.63 NT 0.28 NT NT 0.17 0.36 6.5 0.32 NT 0.02 NT
Timarpur 0.01 7.3 1.69 61.9 0.47 NT 0.32 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.83 0.04 NT NT NT
Narela 0.01 NT 0.05 6.7 NT NT 0.76 NT NT NT NT 0.48 NT NT 1.33 NT
Vasant Kunj NT NT NT 1.91 NT NT 0.25 NT NT NT NT 0.32 NT NT 0.03 NT
Vasant Kunj NT NT NT 2.62 NT NT 0.31 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.19 NT NT 0.04 NT
Okhla NT NT 0.03 3.84 0.02 NT 0.3 NT NT NT NT 0.7 NT NT 0.23 NT
Okhla NT NT 0.03 5.09 NT 0.02 0.34 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.07 NT NT 0.02 NT
Okhla 0.01 NT NT 3.18 NT NT 0.28 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.31 NT NT 0.07 NT
Okhla NT NT NT 2.45 NT NT 0.27 NT NT NT NT 0.08 NT NT 0.04 NT
Okhla NT NT NT 2.45 NT NT 0.27 NT NT NT NT 0.34 NT NT 0.02 NT
Yamuna Vihar NT NT 0.1 2.27 0.01 NT 0.40 NT 0.01 NT NT 0.19 NT NT 0.07 NT
Yamuna Vihar 0.01 NT 0.22 2.63 NT 1.1 0.50 NT NT NT NT 0.28 NT NT 0.14 NT
Keshopur 0.01 NT 0.06 4.59 NT 0.1 0.68 NT NT NT NT 0.56 NT NT 0.15 NT
Keshopur 0.01 NT 0.06 4.59 NT 0.1 0.68 NT NT NT NT 0.06 NT NT 0.04 NT
Kondali NT NT 0.06 1.59 0.03 NT 0.38 NT NT NT NT 0.33 NT NT 0.08 NT
Kondali NT NT 0.02 3.43 NT NT 0.23 NT NT NT NT 0.1 NT NT 0.09 NT
Kondali – – – – – – – NT NT NT NT 0.33 NT NT 0.04 NT
Rithala NT NT 0.06 2.82 NT NT 0.32 NT NT NT NT 0.8 NT NT 0.1 NT
Rithala – – – – – – – NT NT NT NT 0.25 NT NT 0.04 NT
Mehrauli NT NT 0.01 8.7 0.05 NT 0.50 NT NT NT NT 0.11 NT NT 0.03 NT
All values in mg/litre. NT – not traceable; ND – not done; Cd – cadmium; Cr – chromium; Cu – copper; Fe – iron; Ni – nickel; Pb – lead; Zn – zinc; Hg – mercury
Source CPCB (2004 a, b)
Reduction in heavy (toxic) metals in sewage treatment plants, Delhi
For further details. log on to
www.gistindia.org
This monograph is part of a larger effort to build, for India, an empirically based framework of 'green accounting' that would allow decision-makers to develop effective strategic responses to the depletion and accumulation of natural and human capital. In this monograph, we have attempted to adjust national and state accounts for the degradation in water quality over a ten-year period. We have specifically considered the quality changes in groundwater and surface water. The effort is to organize the complex database of water in India and analyse the trend in its quality over a period of time. The quality of water has been judged on well-accepted criteria suggested by government agencies. By adopting a replacement cost approach, the monetary value of the decline in water quality for each use has been estimated. This decline in quality has been treated in the same way as depreciation of man-made capital and has been adjusted against the state domestic products for each of India's states. This monograph should also be seen as an attempt to organize the complexities of information in the country's water sector. Of course, we recognize that the results need to be treated with caution due to data limitations and the difficulties with incorporating water quality data into the SEEA (System of Environment and Economic Accounting) framework.
Monograph 8
In common with most developing nations, India faces many trade-offs in its attempt to improve the living standards of its people. The trade-offs emerge in various arenas, and several mechanisms for decision-making (including political institutions) have been developed to help choose between competing alternatives. Unfortunately, most of these decision mechanisms do not take into account intergenerational choices, i.e. trade-offs between the needs of the present and the future generations. In our view, it is urgently necessary to develop a mechanism to do this because many of the choices we make today could severely affect the welfare of our children tomorrow.
Therefore, we propose to build a framework of national accounts that presents genuine net additions to national wealth. This system of environmentally-adjusted national income accounts will not only account for the depletion of natural resources and the costs of pollution but also reward additions to the stock of human capital.
The Green Accounting for Indian States and Union Territories Project (GAISP) aims to set up economic models for preparing annual estimates of ‘genuine savings’, i.e. true ‘value addition’, at both state and national levels. The publication of the results will enable policy-makers and the public to engage in a debate on the sustainability of growth as well as make cross-state comparisons. It is hoped that a policy consequence of the project is gradual increases in budgetary allocations for improvements in education, public health, and environmental conservation, all of which are key elements needed to secure India’s long-term future.
Green Accounting for Indian Statesand Union Territories Project
Pushpam Kumar
Sanjeev Sanyal
Rajiv Sinha
Pavan Sukhdev