water

Article
Water Pollution in a Densely Populated
Megapolis, Dhaka
Toriqul Bashar 1, * and Ivan W.H. Fung 2
1 Institute for Social Policy, Housing & Equalities Research, Heriot Watt University, Riccarton,
Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK
2 Department of Architecture & Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Tat Chee Avenue,
Hong Kong, China; ivan.fung@cityu.edu.hk
* Correspondence: bashar.inm.bd@gmail.com




Received: 16 June 2020; Accepted: 21 July 2020; Published: 26 July 2020


Abstract: Rapid urbanization has been a boon for industrial growth in Bangladesh, leading the Dhaka
megapolis to become one of the least livable places in the world. These circumstances, however,
have received little attention by policy makers and in academic research. Using mainly secondary
data, this article explores the water quality of the river Buriganga that flows across Dhaka and
identifies major sources of pollutants. While much of the article analyzes the sources and extent
of pollution, it also points toward a great threat to public health from the presence of high levels
of heavy metals, such as chromium, lead, and iron, as well as chemicals, including ammonia and
phosphate. Moreover, the article recommends some policy changes that could potentially reduce
pollution levels and boost water sustainability not only in Dhaka but also in other fast-growing cities
in the least developed countries (LDCs).

Keywords: urbanization; water pollution; environmental sustainability; megapolis; Dhaka; LDCs

1. Introduction
Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, is predicted to be the sixth-largest megapolis by 2030 [1].
Coupled with this rapid growth, it is the most densely populated and least habitable city in the world,
which poses safe water challenges. Dhaka is not a planned city and much of its urbanization is linked to
its industrial development, which over time has resulted in decreased water quality [1,2]. Inadequate
sewage and inefficient waste management contribute to the water pollution, resulting in water quality
in the river to parameters far below the critical limit [3]. Moreover, untreated industrial waste and
household sewage are discharged into the river system, leading to the extinction of aquatic life and the
failure of ecosystems. Furthermore, industrial effluents have damaged land fertility around Buriganga
and affected the agriculture. The accumulation of waste has also reduced the navigability of the river,
adversely affecting the water transportation system [4].
Both industrial and human waste have increased the level of biochemical substances and heavy
metals in water, posing a great threat to the aquatic system and public health [5]. Chemical substances,
such as biodegradable oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD), have increased
the acidity levels in water and destroyed the underwater microorganisms while heavy metals caused a
threat to human organs. The use of fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture likewise contributes to the
deterioration of surface water quality and contaminates groundwater aquifers [6].
The Buriganga is a major source of water for domestic and industrial use, as well as a means of
transportation; it also helps dilute the non-degradable pollutants. However, a high concentration of
pollutants degrades its purification capacity. The dilution and reoxygenation capacity is particularly
reduced significantly during the dry season, resulting in a high presence of BOD and COD, and a low

Water 2020, 12, 2124; doi:10.3390/w12082124 www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2020, 12, 2124 2 of 13

presence of dissolved oxygen (DO). Untreated municipal sewer and industrial effluents result in water
being highly contaminated by eutrophication. During flooding, such polluted water comes in human
contact and adversely affects the public health of the megapolis [7].
A few studies have explored the presence of heavy metals in the aquatic system in the Buriganga,
but the effects of acute toxicity and genotoxicity on the fish and human population have hardly
been addressed [8,9]. Some have studied water pollution in relation to climate change and negative
consequences on urban poverty, mortality, and morbidity [10–12]. However, the study of water pollution
management at different urban levels is scant, especially in the context of LDCs [13]. This article
explores the sources of pollution and analyzes the nature and extent of pollution that negatively impacts
public health, while offering some management strategies of reducing the pollution. Such strategies
address both wastewater management (% of compliant discharges) and waste management (waste
and waste production), which have implications for water sustainability in cities [14].
The succeeding section is set to present a discussion on the methodology. Section 3 discusses
sources of pollution, leading into Section 4, which analyzes the categories of pollution. Section 5
focuses on the extent of pollution, followed by the discussion section highlighting the potential
consequences. Section 7 offers some policy strategies to control pollution at sources. The final section
draws conclusions, while making recommendations for future research and pointing to limitations.

2. Methodology
The study follows a mixed method strategy to analyze the data, collected from both secondary and
primary sources. Primary data were collected from both point and non-point sources that contribute to
water pollution of the river, while visiting physically alongside the river. The study identifies both
point and non-point sources of pollution, as well as the source at the Sewerage Treatment Plant at Pagla
(PSTP). The point sources are grouped into three: Sluice gates alongside the Dhaka Integrated Flood
Protection (DIFP); city drains along the Buriganga; and outfall from the PSTP. The non-point sources
include domestic and industrial waste. We clustered the industries on the basis of type, and measured
the pollution discharge in (m3 /day) at 6 points. Domestic wastewater was observed from Lalbagh
throughout the Babubazar area, and industrial wastewater was observed from Zinzira to Keraniganj.
We looked into industrial pollutants, domestic sewers, clinical waste, and physical encroachment,
which contribute to major pollution of the Buriganga.
Secondary data were collected from institutions, such as Institute of Water Modelling (IWM),
Water & Sanitation Program (WSP), and Dhaka Water Supply & Sanitation Authority (DWASA).
We explored a range of pollutants and their extent, including BOD5 , COD, ammonia (NH3 -N),
ammonium (NH4 -N), nitrate ion (NO3 -N), phosphate ion (PO4 ), chromium (Cr), and lead (Pb) between
2005 and 2018 (measured in kg/day) as well as the “coliform” measure (per 100 mL). We also looked
into the BOD5 presence in wastewater (ml/L), flowrate (m3 /day), and BOD5 level at PSTP. Pollution
was measured using the ‘wet method’ at four seasons. The waste-water flow was counted for 12 h in
a day, taking into account the tidal influence and water consumption practices [15]. Pollution load
= Concentration (mg/L) × Flow (m3 /s) × Flow time [= Conc. (mg/L) × Q (m3 /s) × 12.0 h = Conc.
(gm/m3 )/(1000 gm/kg) × Q (m3 /s) × (3600 s/h) ×12.0 (h/day) = Load (kg/day)].
We analyzed both primary and secondary data and explored the nature and extent of pollutants
in water.

3. Point and Non-Point Sources

Due to poor revenue sources of the city governments, the sewerage network is absent in some
locations, so sewage is connected with the storm water lines there. The disposal of untreated industrial
and chemical waste into storm sewer lines ultimately contaminates the river water. Other causes of
pollution include the solid waste dumping points besides the river, lack of sanitary latrine facilities for
the poor living nearby, obstruction of the natural flow of water due to engrossments, pollutants at the
PSTP, and absence of a sanitary sewage system alongside the Buriganga river.
Water 2020, 12, 2124 3 of 13

Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 13

Industrial and household waste cause damage to the physical, chemical, and biological properties
Industrial and household waste cause damage to the physical, chemical, and biological
of water. High temperature and turbidity, and unbalanced hydrogen (pH) and DO damage algae
properties of water. High temperature and turbidity, and unbalanced hydrogen (pH) and DO
and the water ecosystem. There are mainly two categories of pollution sources—point sources and
damage algae and the water ecosystem. There are mainly two categories of pollution sources—point
non-point source—that contribute to water pollution of the Buriganga and the connecting Turag River.
sources and non-point source—that contribute to water pollution of the Buriganga and the
Pollution loads from various point and non-point sources are tabulated in the tables in Appendix A.
connecting Turag River. Pollution loads from various point and non-point sources are tabulated in
Figure 1 below presents the Buriganga in the southwest of Dhaka, which is connected with the Turag
the tables in Appendix A. Figure 1 below presents the Buriganga in the southwest of Dhaka, which
in the northwest, and Balu and Shitalakhya in the east.
is connected with the Turag in the northwest, and Balu and Shitalakhya in the east.

Figure 1. The Buriganga crossing Dhaka and its connection with other rivers.
Figure 1. The Buriganga crossing Dhaka and its connection with other rivers.

3.1. Point Sources

In reference to map 1, the point sources of pollution of the Buriganga are identified as: Group 1:
Sluice gates alongside the Dhaka Integrated Flood Protection (DIFP);
(DIFP); Group
Group 2:
2: City drains along the
Buriganga, including
Buriganga, includingthe
theDholai
DholaiKhal;
Khal;
andand Group
Group 3: Outfall
3: Outfall from
from the PSTP.
the PSTP. TheseThese sources
sources largelylargely
make
make
the thewater
river rivercontaminated
water contaminated and quality
and the worst the worst qualityusage
for human for and
human usage and
underwater underwater
microorganisms.
microorganisms.
3.1.1. Group 1
3.1.1.The
Group 1 gate along the DIFP Embankment: Eleven sluice gates are found alongside the DIFP
sluice
embankment. Sluice
The sluice gate gatethe
along S-6DIFP
mainly drains out Eleven
Embankment: storm water and sewage
sluice gates from
are found Mohammadpur,
alongside the DIFP
Kallyanpur,
embankment. and adjoining
Sluice gate areas through
S-6 mainly Kallyanpur
drains Khalwater
out storm and part
andofsewage
Ramchandrapur Khal. During
from Mohammadpur,
high-flow
Kallyanpur,seasons, it washes
and adjoining allthrough
areas small-industrial waste
Kallyanpur Khaland
andhousehold waste into the
part of Ramchandrapur Buriganga,
Khal. During
while S-7 drains
high-flow out the
seasons, toxic ternary
it washes waste from Hazaribagh,
all small-industrial waste and which largely waste
household contributes
into to
thethe pollution
Buriganga,
while S-7 drains out the toxic ternary waste from Hazaribagh, which largely contributes to the
pollution of the Buriganga. Along with the tannery waste, it discharges household waste from the
neighboring areas through Kantasur Khal.
Water 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 13
Water 2020, 12, 2124 4 of 13
A part of Ramchandrapur Khal drains out dark and toxic wastewater through S-7. Household
waste from Rayerbazar, Nimtala, Sultanganj, Zigatala, Nawabgonj, Gajmahal, Kantasur, and West
of the Buriganga. Along with the tannery waste, it discharges household waste from the neighboring
Dhanmondi is discharged to Buriganga through S-7, which also carries the tannery waste from
areas through Kantasur Khal.
Nimtala Beel to Buriganga. S-8 also carries tannery waste from Borhanpur, Kanipara, and Battola
A part of Ramchandrapur Khal drains out dark and toxic wastewater through S-7. Household
areas, which
waste fromisRayerbazar,
later discharged
Nimtala,into the Buriganga
Sultanganj, Zigatala,river. Both sources
Nawabgonj, pollute
Gajmahal, the and
Kantasur, water of the
West
Buriganga,
Dhanmondi while S-9 drains
is discharged out wastewater
to Buriganga from
through S-7, Pilkhana,
which Enayetgonj,
also carries Ganaktuly,
the tannery waste Azimpur,
from Nimtala
Bhagalpur,
Beel to Buriganga. S-8 also carries tannery waste from Borhanpur, Kanipara, and Battola areas, which is and
and Nawabgonj, and S-10 drains out wastewater from Shahidnagar, Balughat,
Amligola into the Buriganga.
later discharged into the Buriganga river. Both sources pollute the water of the Buriganga, while S-9
drains out wastewater from Pilkhana, Enayetgonj, Ganaktuly, Azimpur, Bhagalpur, and Nawabgonj,
3.1.2.and
Group
S-10 2
drains out wastewater from Shahidnagar, Balughat, and Amligola into the Buriganga.

Municipal
3.1.2. Group drains:
2 41 drains in Dholai Khal area carry municipal wastewater into Buriganga.
Mostly earthen canals pass over Postagola-Shashan Ghat to Balubazar. In the Dholai Khal area, one
Municipal drains: 41 drains in Dholai Khal area carry municipal wastewater into Buriganga.
of the major
Mostly channels
earthen canalsof water
pass pollution of the Ghat
over Postagola-Shashan rivertoBuriganga,
Balubazar. In40% of theKhal
the Dholai totalarea,
pollutants
one of is
discharged
the majoratchannels
these points
of water(Bhuiyan, Rakib,
pollution of Dampare,
the river Ganyaglo,
Buriganga, 40% of the& Suzuki,
total 2011).
pollutants Gerani Khal,
is discharged
connected
at these points (Bhuiyan, Rakib, Dampare, Ganyaglo, & Suzuki, 2011). Gerani Khal, connected with and
with Dholai Khal, discharges wastewater from part of Narinda, Saidabad, Farashganj,
the adjoining
Dholai Khal,area of Hrishikesh-Dash
discharges Road.
wastewater from Untreated
part wastewater
of Narinda, through these
Saidabad, Farashganj, and channels directly
the adjoining
flowsarea
intoofthe Buriganga river
Hrishikesh-Dash Road.and deteriorates
Untreated its water
wastewater quality.
through these channels directly flows into the
Buriganga river and deteriorates its water quality.
3.1.3. Group 3
3.1.3. Group 3
The Pagla Sewerage Treatment Plant (PSTP): The PSTP is the only point where municipal
The Pagla Sewerage Treatment Plant (PSTP): The PSTP is the only point where municipal
wastewater
wastewater is treated before
is treated falling
before fallinginto
intothe
theBuriganga. Thisplant
Buriganga. This plantisislocated
locatedat at
S-7S-7
andand Dholai
Dholai Khal,Khal,
whichwhichcontrols thethe
controls pollution
pollutionlevel
levelofof wastewater
wastewater atatthat that point.
point. AsAs such,
such, the level
the level of pollution
of pollution is less
is less at
at S-7 and Dholai Khal, compared to that of other sluice gates alongside
S-7 and Dholai Khal, compared to that of other sluice gates alongside the Buriganga river. However, the Buriganga river.
However,
the PSTPthetreats
PSTPa treats a lowerofvolume
lower volume wastewater of wastewater thandue
than its capacity its capacity
to the lowdueflowtoofthe low flow of
wastewater
3 /day), and3 such plants are absent at points of other
wastewater during dry seasons (approximately 48,000 m /day), and such plants are absent at points
during dry seasons (approximately 48,000 m
sluicesluice
of other gates gates
alongside the Buriganga
alongside river. The river.
the Buriganga following
TheFigure 2 demonstrates
following Figure 2 the dark wastewater,
demonstrates the dark
wastewater, which directly falls into the Buriganga in the absence of the Sewerage TreatmentofPlant
which directly falls into the Buriganga in the absence of the Sewerage Treatment Plant at the points
at theallpoints
sluice of
gates
all except
sluice S-7 andexcept
gates pollutes S-7the river
and water. the river water.
pollutes

Figure 2. The
Figure usual
2. The quality
usual qualityofofwastewater fallingthrough
wastewater falling throughthethe sluice
sluice gates.
gates.

3.2. Non-Point Sources

Numerous non-point sources of domestic and industrial waste also contribute to water pollution
of the Buriganga. Significant domestic wastewater is discharged into the Buriganga water from the
Lalbagh area throughout the Babubazar area. The indiscriminate release of wastewater deteriorates
the quality of water, particularly in the dry season when the volume of water is lower, resulting in
Water 2020, 12, 2124 5 of 13

3.2. Non-Point Sources

Numerous non-point sources of domestic and industrial waste also contribute to water pollution
of the Buriganga. Significant domestic wastewater is discharged into the Buriganga water from the
Lalbagh area throughout the Babubazar area. The indiscriminate release of wastewater deteriorates
the quality of water, particularly in the dry season when the volume of water is lower, resulting in
the river water becoming more dark with a pungent smell. Moreover, industrial wastewater from the
densely populated Zinzira to Keraniganj significantly contaminates the Buriganga water.
Both point and non-point sources of pollution ultimately transform the water into the condition
that is visible in Figure 2.

4. Categories of Pollution
Industrial pollutants, domestic sewage, and clinical waste largely contribute to the water pollution
of the Buriganga river. The untreated sewage and industrial waste pollute the water. As a result,
the water looks dark at some points, and a greasy film on the surface is visible in a vast area of the
river. The concentration of pollutants at different points of the river is, however, due to the adjacent
source and type of pollutants being discharged into the river.

4.1. Industrial Pollutants

Both light and heavy industries that contribute to pollution of the river water include textiles,
polythene, rubber, dry cell, cosmetics, paint, soap, plastics, and chemicals. Leather and textile industries
channel toxic wastewater into the Buriganga (and Turag) and contribute much to river pollution.
Approximately 15,800 m3 of wastewater are discharged per day from the sole leather industries in
Hazaribagh area, and 3400 m3 of wastewater from the textile industries in Fatullah, which contributes
to 17,600 and 3850 kg/day, respectively, of BOD. The pollution contributors to Dhaka’s rivers and its
location are presented in Table 1. The total BOD load at several points of the Buriganga near these
industries is much higher than tolerable levels, making river water highly contaminated and toxic for
human use and the water ecosystem.

Table 1. Industries in and around Dhaka.

Number of Total Waste Water Total BOD Discharged

Cluster Name Type of Industry
Industries Discharged (m3 /Day) Load (kg/Day) into River
Hazaribag Leather 136 15,800 17,600 Turag
Tongi BSCIC Textile 13 4300 4400 Tongi Khal
Fatulla Textile 6 3400 3850 Buriganga
Kanchpur Textile 9 4300 3480 Lakhaya
Tejgaon Textile, Chemical 43 3885 2435 Begunbari Kkal
Source: [16].

Some pollutants are biodegradable and transformed through a particular biochemical process.
Other non-biodegradable pollutants, such as heavy metals, including lead and chromium, and chemical
substances deteriorate the water quality of the river, and reduce the anchorage capacity of the Buriganga.
Heavy metals are harmful for the functioning of the human brain, kidney, lungs, liver, and blood
circulation, and long-term exposure to heavy metals may cause cancer [17,18].

4.2. Domestic Pollutants

Domestic sewage also contributes to water pollution of the Buriganga river. Household waste
and sewers that run through either drainage or earthen channels ultimately fall into the river and
contaminate water. Such contamination contains dissolved and suspended pollutant particles, which are
sources of disease-causing bacteria. Various chemical substances that are used for keeping households
clean contribute to river water pollution. Non-sanitary toilets, particularly in the low-income areas
and slum neighborhoods, contribute much to water pollution as they contain both viral and bacterial
Water 2020, 12, 2124 6 of 13

diseases. These pathogens can be a serious threat to public health if they are transmitted into drinking
water [19].

4.3. Clinical Waste

Except the International Centre for Diarrheal Disease Research, Bangladesh (ICDDRB), more than
500 hospitals/clinics across Dhaka generate 20 t of hazardous and toxic medical waste per day; a quarter
of such waste constitutes infectious substances that can potentially cause diseases. This huge amount of
untreated medical substances is mostly dumped into the Buriganga rivers, which causes serious public
health concern. Moreover, improper disposal and management of medical waste causes adverse effects
as the infectious pollutants leach into the ground water and heavy metals in the leachate contaminate
the underground water [20].

4.4. Encroachment
The river flowing by the western flank of Dhaka encounters 244 establishments, including
makeshift homes, small factories, dockyards, and boat-making workshops [21]. Approximately
50 acres of land around the Buriganga is seen to be encroached, of which 38.7 acres are in Kotwali
and 4.3 acres are in the Keraniganj area. The encroachment usually takes place during the dry season
by influential quarters, all the way down the flood protection embankment, making the Buriganga
a narrow channel in some parts. Structures are built on the encroached land along the Buriganga,
and garbage is indiscriminately dumped for landfill, particularly in Kamrangir Char, Kamalbagh,
and Islampur. Despite the government’s interventions to protect the river channel, the encroachment
continues, damaging the river’s capacity to be navigable as well as bearing the brunt of a huge volume
of pollutants.

5. Pollution Parameters and Loads

A high level of biochemical and chemical organic substances is observed in the Buriganga river
water. According to Table 2, all parameters exceed the standard critical levels for both drinking and
fishing, particular in the upper Buriganga water. For example, the DO level in water is less than 1 mg/L,
whereas the standard minimum requirement is 4 for drinking and 5 for fishing. Similarly, the BOD
presence is as high as 12–55 mg/L against the standard maximum level of 3–6 mg/L. Other parameters
in water are far above the corresponding standard levels for human use and underwater organisms.

Table 2. Water quality standard of the Buriganga river.

Standard Value Observed Value

Parameter
Drinking Fishing Upper Buriganga Lower Buriganga
DO mg/L 4 5 0 <1.0
BOD mg/L 3 6 35–55 12
COD mg/L - - 60–90 20
NH3 mg/L 2 0.02 8–10 0.4–0.5
NH4 + mg/L 2 1.2 16–17 7–10
NO3 − mg/L 10 40 1.5–1.8 2–3
PO4 − mg/L 6 - 0.4 0.4
Cr mg/L 0.05 0.02 0.006–0.27 0.002–0.004
Pb mg/L 0.10 0.10 0.001 0.001
Zn mg/L 5 0.10 1–4 1–4
Hg mg/L 0.001 0.0001 <0.001 <0.001
Cl mg/L 600 600 40–80 40–80
SS mg/L - 25 60–100 60–100
Alkalinity mg/L - 70–100 150–175 150–175
Coliform 1000/100 mL 0 - 8–160 8–160
Source: [22]. Notes: The standard DO represents the minimum required value, while others represent the maximum
levels of concentration. The upper Buriganga water flows between Hazaribagh and Kamrangir Char and the lower
Buriganga between Chadnighat and Nabinagar.
Water 2020, 12, 2124 7 of 13

According to Tables 3 and 4, the BOD levels at points S-7, S-9, and S-10 are high enough to suggest
that both domestic and industrial pollutants are major contributors of pollution of the Buriganga
river. A high concentration of COD, NH3 -N, NH4 -N, NO3 -N, and PO4 in water at all points, which is
remarkably high at point S-7, indicates the presence of eutrophication. High levels of COD and
chemicals, such as nitrogen, ammonia and ammonium, nitrate, and phosphate, demonstrate the worst
quality river water. Such a high concentration of chemicals and heavy metals adversely affects both the
human and fish population who rely heavily on the Buriganga water.

Table 3. Sampling sites of Institute of Water Modelling for the Buriganga River.

Waste Water Outlet Drain for Monitoring Water Quality Monitoring Station
Sluice No. 7 (Katasur) Buri—1 (Mirpur Bridge)
Sluice No. 8 (Hazaribagh) Buri—2 (Basila)
Sluice No. 9 (Islampur) Buri—3 (Islampur)
Sluice No. 10 (lalbagh) Buri—4 (Islampur)
Dholai Khal Buri—5 (Chadnighat)
PSTP (Pagla) Buri—6 (Pagla)
- Buri—7 (Fatulla)
- Buri—8(Hariharpara)
- Buri—9 (Nabinagar)
Source: [22].

Table 4. Wastewater pollutant in four outlets.

Parameter Tested (mg/L)

Sample Location Flow Rate (m3 /s)
BOD COD NH3 -N NH4 -N NO3 -N PO4 Cr Pb
S-7 0.82 425 2134 1.40 84.10 8.9 6.25 1.75 <0.001
S-8 0.3 60 205 0.30 20.96 1.2 1.55 0.05 <0.001
S-9 0.32 150 585 0.16 27.34 5.0 9.45 0.01 <0.001
S-10 1.2 140 565 0.09 25.66 5.7 7.65 0.01 <0.001
Source: [22].

Furthermore, the level of pollution deteriorates or remains almost unchanged. For instance,
the BOD5 parameter increased two-fold between 2005 and 2014, while other parameters still remain
above the critical levels, which illustrates the low-quality water of Buriganga. Over the period,
the BOD5 level increased two-fold, from 45,388 to 90,176 kg/day, demonstrating the continuous
deterioration (Table 5). Though the NO3 N level decreased from 5762 kg/day in 2008 to 1038 kg/day in
2013, it increased at slower rates. Presumably, this happened due to relocation of the leather processing
industries from Dhaka to Savar. This particular industry contributed to a high level of Cr and Pb in the
Buriganga water, which is evident at points S-7 through S-10, all of which exceed the toxic levels.

Table 5. Pollution loads in water.

Pollution Load (kg/Day)

River Observation Period
BOD5 NH3 -N PO4 Cr Pb
5 April 45,388 - - - -
8 February 58,000 5762 2333 17 18
13 April 37,547 1038 - 15 50
Buriganga
13 December 106,225 1078 - 84 -
14 March 78,033 1111 - 490 8
14 April 90,176 1137 1582 12 -
Source: [22].
Water 2020, 12, 2124 8 of 13

6. Discussion
The “Coliform” in the Buriganga water gradually increased, though it increased in the connected
Turag, Balu, and Lakhya rivers during the period between 1990 and 2018 [23]. Additionally, the DO
levels varied between 0 and 2.0 mg/L at several points (between Mirpur Bridge and Pagla), which is far
below the standard level for human use and to support the aquatic life in the Buriganga. The maximum
BOD5 level (240 mg/L) was observed in the dry seasons (e.g., December, which is far above the critical
levels for drinking and fishing at Hazaribagh through Keranigang (IWM 2018). COD was also as high
as 60–90 mg/L in the dry season. The underwater aquifer is polluted by the seepage of heavy metals,
such as chromium, which reached a level that has long-term effects on human health [24].
The Buriganga water contains a huge amount of toxic substances, such as pathogenic organisms,
oxygen-demanding waste, plant nutrients, synthetic organic chemicals, inorganic chemicals, radioactive
substances, oil, and heat, all of which have negative consequences on water sustainability and public
health. In particular, untreated waste from tanneries—approximately 95,000 L per day—continues to
contribute to water pollution of the Buriganga, which is harmful [25]. Though some of the tannery
industries have moved to Savar, the relocation of tanneries from Dhaka to Savar has largely been
unsuccessful, resulting in sustained contamination of the Buriganga water [26,27]. A high level of
organic and bacterial pollutants is still evident, concerning biological pollution of the Buriganga [28].
Oxygen-demanding substances, in addition to decomposing material, which makes use of
oxygen during the process of decay, reduce the amount of oxygen in the environment. Sediments
and suspended solids consist of mostly inorganic material washed into rivers. Nutrients, mainly
nitrogen and phosphorus, can accelerate eutrophication, or the rapid biological “aging”. Industrial
and municipal wastewater contains high concentrations of organic carbon, phosphorus, and nitrogen,
while also possibly containing pesticides, toxic chemicals, salts, inorganic solids (e.g., silt), as well as
pathogenic bacteria and viruses that pose a great threat to cities’ populations [29,30].
Water contamination incurs costs to public health through the transmission of bacterial and
viral waterborne diseases. A high level of pollution causes diarrhea, typhoid, and malaria/dengue,
which is common in cities, which may turn into an epidemic as cities are densely populated. Moreover,
the presence of excessive heavy metals in water, such as Cr, Pb, and iron (Fe), as well as chemicals, such as
ammonia and phosphate, can pose serious threats to public health. Copper (Cu), Pb, and cadmium (Cd)
can cause dysfunctions of human organs, and harm the human brain, kidney, lungs, liver, and blood
circulation; a longer exposure may even cause cancer.
Furthermore, chemical substances can affect aquatic life and destroy the habitat of flora and fauna
as high acid levels kill the microorganisms in water and prevent them from reproducing. Moreover,
using polluted water for irrigation can contaminate underground aquifers and the human food chain,
while also posing risks of bioaccumulation for future generations [31]. Agricultural wastes contain high
levels of phosphorus and nitrogen, organic carbon, pesticide, and fecal coliform bacteria. Moreover,
mercury is methylated by aquatic organisms, before being transmitted into food.
The biodegradation process breaks down the pollutants as microorganisms use organic substances
as a source of carbon and energy. Many organic materials, however, enter into the watercourses at a
high enough level so that they are also responsible for water pollution. Again, anaerobic decomposition
is usually performed by a completely different set of microorganisms, to which oxygen may even
be toxic.

7. Policy Responses
The pollution of the Buriganga exceeds the tolerable levels of human consumption and the aquatic
ecosystem, posing a great threat to the urban livelihood and underwater organisms. Sustainable water
policy will need to address the issue urgently to avoid a potential epidemic. Such policy will include
both short-term and long-term management strategies that have potential implications for reducing
the water pollution levels.
Water 2020, 12, 2124 9 of 13

7.1. Sewage and Effluents Control

Firstly, compulsory waste treatment can be enforced in industrial policy. Such enforcement will
reduce the volume of industrial effluents, as well as sewage and wastes. The industry can install
separate treatment plants for sewage and effluents so that the harmful substances are properly treated.
Moreover, the policy must speed up the relocation of tannery industries from Dhaka, which will
substantially reduce the toxic substances in water of the Buriganga and connecting rivers.
Effective policy must also include strategies for controlling the indiscriminate disposal of sewage
into water that contains organic pollutants. Such policy must enforce strategies for the treatment of
medical waste, and might involve introducing the Plasma Arc System, which is common in many
countries in the world [32]. The policy must also take necessary steps to stop connections between
sanitary sewage and storm sewer, as well as the dumping of garbage in nearby rivers. Public awareness
can also reduce the amount of garbage into sewage lines. An introduction of pricing on effluent volume
could significantly reduce the water pollution.

7.2. Regulatory Measures

Secondly, planning and land-zoning policy can control the water pollution of the Buriganga.
Such policies include building an embankment on the south, and demarcating the river bank and
wetland from other areas. Installation of treatment plants at Keraniganj and Kamrangir Char and
setting up public toilets in the adjacent slum areas will reduce the water pollution of the rivers.
Relocating the industrial zone to outside could significantly reduce the pollution levels. Policies
must introduce regulations for preserving depression areas to reduce surface run-off into the river,
and for setting up community-based plants for composting the domestic waste. Moreover, a public
campaign to save Buriganga would have potential implications, yet it should be participatory and
involve elected representatives. Moreover, public sector involvement and regulatory instruments
could tackle illegal encroachment. Such a policy would incorporate strategies to dredge the riverbed
and enhance navigability, and adequate plants and maintenance of the riverbank will improve the
surrounding environment and appearance of the river.

7.3. Institutional Enforcement

Finally, policy must enforce the legal measures to control pollution of the Buriganga and other
connected rivers. To this end, it must include periodical Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs).
The Department of Environment must actively monitor the pollution levels and take necessary measures
to maintain the water quality for human consumption and aquatic ecosystems, until a separate authority
to save the Buriganga and other rivers is formed. Toxic chemicals and organic substances must be
controlled through regulatory measures under the Environmental Protection Act 1995, with updated
regulations and guidelines to keep the surface and underground water safe. Appropriate laws of
penalties must also be enforced to control pollution and improve the water quality.
An autonomous authority could carry out the strategies for controlling pollution at sources. Such an
authority might monitor the presence and level of various polluting substances in water and carry
out investigations into the biodiversity and water ecosystems. The authority may also encourage the
involvement of other relevant government agencies, including Department of Environment, Industry,
Environment and Forest, Water Resources and Land, as well as non-governmental organizations in
such efforts.

8. Conclusions
The study carried out an investigation into the water pollution in the Buriganga by exploring
the sources and pollution that pose a great threat to public health and the water sustainability of
the megapolis. Such a threat is inflicted from waterborne diseases that can spread rapidly, and their
high potential for contagion into epidemic levels, particularly in the densely populated city. Such a
Water 2020, 12, 2124 10 of 13

threat is amplified as pollution levels far exceed the tolerable limits of human use and underwater
microorganisms. Moreover, the contaminated groundwater and the presence of toxic substances in
water have adverse effects on the human food chain, causing generational health impacts, specifically
for the poorest segments of society [33]. Such concerns demonstrate that a policy response is urgent, in
order to contain water pollution at a level to avoid the looming catastrophe in fast-growing cities in
LDCs [34]. This study presented some policy measures that have been deemed effective for controlling
the river water pollution in fast growing cities in LDCs. The magnitude of the threat from each of the
polluting substances, however, demands further investigation under a highly technical team. This is
so that appropriate pollution-controlling measures specific to each of these pollutants are in place to
inform the policy. Nevertheless, the study has been able to clarify issues of the water pollution of the
river that contribute to the literature of water sustainability of cities in LDCs.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, T.B. and I.W.H.F.; methodology, T.B.; formal analysis, T.B.; investigation,
T.B.; resources, T.B.; data curation, T.B.; writing—original draft preparation, T.B.; writing—review and editing,
T.B and I.W.H.F.; funding acquisition, I.W.H.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research is funded by the Institute of Safety and Health Practitioners, Hong Kong, grant number
HK/ISHP/02. www.ishp.org.hk/en/.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection and interpretation of data; in writing or decision to publish the results.

Appendix A

Table A1. BOD load discharged into the Buriganga from PSTP treatment plant.

Flow Rate (m3 /Day)

Date BOD5 (mg/L) Average Flow (m3 /Day) BOD5 Load (kg/Day)
Max. Min.
8 March 240 46,440 38,700 42,570 10,216.80
8 April 240 52,200 39,960 46,080 11,059.20
8 May 60 56,520 41,328 48,924 2935.44
8 June 20 49,680 40,860 45,270 905.40
13 April 150 31,000 15,000 26,000 3450.00
13
170 29,952 15,000 22,476 3820.92
December
14 February 240 27,360 16,338 21,849 5243.76
14 March 200 29,016 14,028 21,522 4304.40
14 April 200 39,780 19,278 29,529 5905.80
15 March 190 42,980 21,250 27,870 -
17 March 175 40,600 20,500 22,500 5500.20
Source: [22].

• Observations at S4, S5, and S6 points were not available during April 2013 and December 2013.
Therefore, values from measurements taken in March 2014 were used to calculate pollution loads
of the Turag River.
• Observations of S11 were not available during April 2013 and April 2014.
• Values from measurements taken in March 2014 were taken to compute loads for the Buriganga
River. The load contributed by the PSTP into the Buriganga is not included in the table.
• The load contributed by non-point sources is not included in the table.
• Values in shaded areas are provisional and the authority of the data is therefore limited.
• Measurements of NH3 , PO4 , Cr, and Pb were not available at the PSTP outfall so these were
calculated using the level of BOD observed during 2008.
Water 2020, 12, 2124 11 of 13

Table A2. Pollution load into the peripheral Buriganga through different point sources, e.g.,
wastewater drains.

Load (kg/Day)
Point Sources Time
BOD5 COD NH3 -N NH4-N NO3 -N PO4 Cr Pb
8 February 41,100 - 4500 - - 1430 8.3 12.8
13 April 26,097 136,819 35 9285 - - 8.7 45.9
S8, S9, S10, S11,
13 December 94,404 167,631 57 12,002 351 - 77.7 -
Dholai Khal
14 March 65,729 155,030 67.5 7689 213.2 - 483.2 3.4
14 April 76,270 153,511 18 4060 1317.6 905 4.19 -
15 April 76,650 160,500 19 4560 1422 1230 8.9 6.3
16 April 55,730 155,000 21 5560 1162 920 12.0 9.2
Source: [22] (Estimation is based on a single measurement in a day).

Table A3. Pollution loads contributed by non-point sources estimated using the dry method.

Load (kg/Day)
Discharge into Non-Point Sources
BOD5 COD NH3 -N NH4 -N NO3 -N PO4 Cr Pb
Buriganga City drains 8000 NA 840 NA NA 250 5.0 3.5
Lakhya Lakhya 4150 NA 430 NA NA 140 1.0 1.5
Tongi Khal Tongi 5160 NA 540 NA NA 170 1.5 2.0
Dhaleswari Dhaleswari 2800 NA 290 NA NA 100 0.5 0.90
Source: [15].

Table A4. Pollution loads of other wastewater outlets.

Pollution Load (kg/Day)

Station Date of Collection
BOD5 COD NH3 -N NH4 -N NO3 -N PO4 Cr Pb
S-4 14 March 2018 6718 11,073 75.3 3284 211.5 NA 27.12 2.74
S-5 14 March 2018 225 372 1.4 177 3.5 NA 0.80 0.46
S-5 27 April 2018 130 298 1.1 66 7.3 22.25 0.00 -
S-6 15 March 2018 10,584 17,600 7.3 1595 96.8 NA 0.27 0.29
S-6 27 April 2018 2722 8346 17.3 1344 127.0 568.51 0.03 -
S-7 27 April 2017 25,834 49,758 66.8 3359 N.A. NA 83.68 8.03
S-7 31 December 2017 24,116 39,950 425.8 1861 41.6 NA 372.89 80.33
S-7 15 March 2018 90,685 150,906 132.8 4012 410.9 NA 515.77 0.40
S-7 27 April 2018 15,055 75,595 49.5 2979 315.3 221.40 61.85 -
S-8 27 April 2017 544 2,994 8.9 725 N.A. NA 0.82 2.55
S-8 31 December 2017 1913 3732 5.8 815 15.6 NA 2.64 -
S-8 15 March 2018 25,855 43,074 45.0 1298 50.8 NA 479.91 0.18
S-8 27 April 2018 778 2657 3.7 272 15.6 20.09 0.62 -
S-9 27 April 2017 5616 18,101 1.7 646 N.A. NA 1.64 6.31
S-9 31 December 2017 3672 8208 6.0 924 36.7 NA 1.62 -
S-9 14 March 2018 16,200 27,009 1.4 413 7.8 NA 2.20 2.90
S-9 27 March 2018 2074 8087 2.2 378 69.1 130.64 0.19 -
S-10 27 April 2017 5400 23,112 2.2 829 N.A. NA 1.47 6.31
S-10 31 December 2017 13,893 23,879 6.9 1577 63.7 NA 2.37 -
S-10 14 March 2018 4277 7023 0.5 171 14.3 N.A. 0.31 0.26
S-10 27 April 2018 7258 29,290 4.4 1330 295.5 396.58 0.58 -
S-11 31 December 2017 2350 4804 5.9 1324 27.6 NA 1.97 -
S-11 16 March 2018 497 812 1.0 194 4.3 NA 0.02 0.05
Dholai Khal 27 April 2017 14,040 91,800 21.6 6890 N.A. NA 4.75 30.67
Dholai Khal 31 December 2017 72,576 12,7008 32.8 7361 207.4 NA 69.12 -
Dholai Khal 27 March 2018 18,900 77,112 19.7 5613 136.1 NA 0.73
Dholai Khal 23 April 2018 65,664 112,666 6.9 1885 933.1 357.70 2.76 -
Norai Khal 29 April 2018 8661 39,681 44.1 4129 N.A. NA 0.47 35.90
Norai Khal 25 February 2017 17,963 34,728 128.7 11867 449.1 NA 5.99 -
Source: [22] (Adjusted).
Water 2020, 12, 2124 12 of 13

References
1. UN. The World’s Cities in 2016—Data Booklet. In Statistical Papers-United Nations (Ser. A), Population and
Vital Statistics Report; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2016.
2. Desa, U. World Urbanization Prospects (the 2011 Revision); Population Division, Department of Economic and
Social Affairs, United Nations Secretariat: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
3. Bashar, T. Structural and Other Attributes of House Price: The Case of Bangladesh. J. Bangladesh Inst. Plan.
2012, 5, 13–24.
4. Kamal, M. Assessment of Impact of Pollutants in the River Buriganga usiNG A WATER Quality Model.
Master’s Thesis, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh, January 1996.
5. Zhou, C.; Li, S.; Wang, S. Examining the Impacts of Urban Form on Air Pollution in Developing Countries:
A Case Study of China’s Megacities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1565. [CrossRef]
6. Rahman, S.; Hossain, F. Spatial assessment of water quality in peripheral rivers of Dhaka City for optimal
relocation of water intake point. Water Resour. Manag. 2008, 22, 377–391. [CrossRef]
7. Nguyen, H.Q.; Radhakrishnan, M.; Huynh, T.T.H.; Baino-Salingay, M.L.; Ho, L.P.; Van der Steen, P.;
Pathirana, A. Water Quality Dynamics of Urban Water Bodies during Flooding in Can Tho City, Vietnam.
Water 2017, 9, 260. [CrossRef]
8. Ahmed, M.; Kundu, G.; Al-Mamun, M.; Sarkar, S.; Akter, M.; Khan, M. Chromium (VI) induced acute toxicity
and genotoxicity in freshwater stinging catfish, Heteropneustes fossilis. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2013, 92,
64–70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Ahmed, M.K.; Baki, M.A.; Islam, M.S.; Kundu, G.K.; Habibullah-Al-Mamun, M.; Sarkar, S.K.; Hossain, M.M.
Human health risk assessment of heavy metals in tropical fish and shellfish collected from the river Buriganga,
Bangladesh. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2015, 22, 15880–15890. [CrossRef]
10. Banks, N.; Roy, M.; Hulme, D. Neglecting the urban poor in Bangladesh: Research, policy and action in the
context of climate change. Environ. Urban. 2011, 23, 487–502. [CrossRef]
11. Revi, A. Climate change risk: An adaptation and mitigation agenda for Indian cities. Environ. Urban. 2008,
20, 207–229. [CrossRef]
12. Satterthwaite, D. Missing the Millennium Development Goal targets for water and sanitation in urban areas.
Environ. Urban. 2016, 28, 99–118. [CrossRef]
13. He, B.; Zhao, D.; Zhu, J.; Darko, A.; Gou, Z. Promoting and implementing urban sustainability in China:
An integration of sustainable initiatives at different urban scales. Habitat Int. 2018, 82, 83–93. [CrossRef]
14. Cruz, N.; Marques, R. Scorecards for sustainable local governments. Cities 2014, 39, 165–170. [CrossRef]
15. Bashar, T.; Hossen, Z.; Sultana, S. A Study on Pollution of the River Buriganga. BURP Thesis, Bangladesh
University of Engineering & Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh, February 2003.
16. WSP. Water Quality Report on Buriganga. Available online: https://www.wsp.org/index.php/sites/wsp/files/
publications/WSP%2520SPI%2520Country%2520Report%2520-%2520Bangladesh%2520final.pdf (accessed
on 25 May 2018).
17. Engwa, G.A.; Ferdinand, P.U.; Nwalo, F.N.; Unachukwu, M.N. Mechanism and health effects of heavy metal
toxicity in humans. In Poisoning in the Modern World-New Tricks for an Old Dog? Intech Open: London, UK,
2019.
18. Islam, M.S.; Hossain, M.B.; Matin, A.; Sarker, M.S.I. Assessment of heavy metal pollution, distribution and
source apportionment in the sediment from Feni River estuary, Bangladesh. Chemosphere 2018, 202, 25–32.
[CrossRef]
19. Hasan, M.K.; Shahriar, A.; Jim, K.U. Water pollution in Bangladesh and its impact on public health. Heliyon
2019, 5, e02145. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Manzoor, J.; Sharma, M. Impact of Biomedical Waste on Environment and Human Health. Environ. Claims J.
2019, 31, 311–334. [CrossRef]
21. DoE. Waste Disposal Regulations; Department of Environment, Government of Bangladesh: Dhaka,
Bangladesh, 2011.
22. IWM. Water Pollution Report in and around Dhaka City; Institute of Water Modelling: Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2019.
23. WB. Rapid Assessment of Greater Dhaka Groundwater Sustainability; The World Bank: Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2019.
24. Chaudhary, H.; Shahid, W.; Bano, A.; Ullah, F.; Munis, F.; Fahad, S.; Ahmad, I. In vitro analysis of cupressus
sempervirens L. plant extracts antibacterial activity. J. Med. Plants Res. 2012, 6, 273–276.
Water 2020, 12, 2124 13 of 13

25. Azom, M.; Mahmud, K.; Yahya, S.M.; Sontu, A.; Himon, S. Environmental impact assessment of tanneries:
A case study of Hazaribag in Bangladesh. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Dev. 2012, 3, 152. [CrossRef]
26. Bhuiyan, M.A.; Rakib, M.; Dampare, S.; Ganyaglo, S.; Suzuki, S. Surface water quality assessment in the
central part of Bangladesh using multivariate analysis. KSCE J. Civ. Eng. 2011, 15, 995–1003. [CrossRef]
27. Shen, T.T. Industrial Pollution Prevention; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1995.
28. Saha, M.L.; Khan, M.R.; Ali, M.; Hoque, S. Bacterial load and chemical pollution level of the River Buriganga,
Dhaka, Bangladesh. Bangladesh J. Bot. 2009, 38, 87–91. [CrossRef]
29. Das, P.; Samantaray, S.; Rout, G. Studies on cadmium toxicity in plants: A review. Environ. Pollut. 1997, 98,
29–36. [CrossRef]
30. BWP. Rapid Assessment of Groundwater Sustainability in Dhaka; Bangladesh Water Partnership: Dhaka,
Bangladesh, 2016.
31. ADB. Dhaka Environmentally Sustainable Water Supply Project; Asian Development Bank: Dhaka, Bangladesh, 2018.
32. Liu, Z.M.; Cui, S.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, C.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, Y. Plasma arc welding: Process variants and its recent
developments of sensing, controlling and modeling. J. Manuf. Process. 2016, 23, 315–327. [CrossRef]
33. Arias-Barreiro, C.; Nishizaki, H.; Okubo, K.; Aoyama, I.; Mori, I. Ecotoxicological characterization of tannery
wastewater in Dhaka, Bangladesh. J. Environ. Biol. 2010, 31, 471–475. [PubMed]
34. Mahmud-ul-Islam, S. Land Use Change Detection of the Buriganga River Using GIS Tools and its Water
Management for Promoting a Sustainable Environment. Master’s Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology,
Stockholm, Sweden, May 2011.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).