Ram Krishna REGMI(UNU-IAS Postdoctoral Fellow)
Water quality modeling to assess CiliwungRiver pollution in Jakarta, Indonesia
March 14, 20161
• Sources of pollution of surface water crossing Jakarta:– Water from households, commercial buildings– Discharges from industries– Pesticide and fertilizer run-off from agricultural land– Solid waste– Fecal matter from overflowing or leaking septic tanks
2
Background
• Ciliwung River catchment is the biggest river intersectingthe Jakarta Province.
• This research work was focused on Ciliwung Rivercatchment in Jakarta to study the current trend of changes inthe level of water quality parameters along the river usingWEAP (Water Evaluation And Planning) model.
3
Background
• Highly flexible hydrologic-water quality model and largelyused for integrated water resources planning andmanagement.
• GIS-based, graphical drag & drop interface• Mass balance equations are the foundation of WEAP model• Scenario management capabilities
4River Catchments in the Jabodetabek Region
Study Area
Jakarta City
5
Study Area
152.63km2
64.75km2
52.90km2
45.89km2
73.60km2
Total: 389.77km2
!
Ciliwung River Catchment
Sebelum Pintu Air Manggarai WQ Stn
Intake PAM Condet WQ Stn
Kp Kelapa Gauging Stn
Sugutamu Gauging Stn
Katulampa Gauging Stn
!
WWTP covered area =13.93km2
!
6
Study AreaPopulation
Year
Popu
latio
n
CA1
CA2
CA3
CA4
CA5
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Year CA1 CA2 CA3 CA4 CA52000 167,081 341,593 424,851 431,276 937,694 2007 212,372 491,636 499,155 449,467 966,153 2010 301,390 719,690 683,279 584,649 1,244,221 2015 386,463 938,731 819,270 652,527 1,373,714 2020 487,259 1,100,199 928,130 721,519 1,487,356 2030 752,479 1,358,621 1,108,621 873,167 1,667,095
Meteorological Data
7
24.5
25.0
25.5
26.0
26.5
27.0
27.5
0102030405060708090
100
Average Temperature (°C)
Average Relative Humidity (%)
Max = 27.23°CMin = 25.68°C
Max = 86.34%Min = 69.71%R
H(%
)
Tem
p (°
C)
8
WEAP interface
Discharge/ Water Quality stationWater SourceWater demand siteWastewater treatment
9
Head In-flow Conditions
0
2
4
6
8
10 Monthly Average DO
DO
(mg/
l)
Max = 8.84 mg/lMin = 6.78 mg/l
0
1
2
3
BO
D (m
g/l)
Monthly Average BOD
Max = 2.36 mg/lMin = 1.40 mg/l
0
5
10
15
20
25Monthly Average Discharge
Flow
(m3 /s
) Max = 22.29 m3/s Min = 4.04 m3/s
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
CO
D (m
g/l)
Monthly Average COD
Max = 10.72 mg/lMin = 6.34 mg/l
WQ parameters were approximated as per the data presented in “http://hywr.kuciv.kyoto-u.ac.jp/ihp/riverCatalogue/Vol_05/3_Indonesia-11.pdf”
0
100
200
300
400
500 2015 2030
10
Rai
nfal
l (m
m)
Month
Rainfall Conditions
Max = 433 mmMin = 76 mm
Max = 436 mmMin = 17 mm
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
11
Average monthly discharge at Kp Kelapa station (2000-2007)
Flow
(m3 /s
)
Month
!
Results
Max = 33.8 m3/sMin = 6.8 m3/s
Max = 40.6 m3/sMin = 5.7 m3/s
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
12
Flow
(CM
S)Discharge at different stations (simulation)
!Fl
ow (C
MS)
Month
2015
2030
Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
13
DO
(mg/
l)
Water quality parameters at Intake PAM Condet (2008-2014)
DO
BOD
BO
D (m
g/l)
CO
D (m
g/l)
Month
Month
!
Results
COD
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
SimulationMeasurement
14
DO
(mg/
l)
Water quality parameters at Sebelum Pintu Air Manggarai (2008-2014)
DO
BOD
BO
D (m
g/l)
CO
D (m
g/l)
Month
Month
!
Results
COD
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
15
DO
(mg/
l)DO at different stations (simulation)
!D
O (m
g/l)
Month
Results
DO < 5mg/l considered as not suitable for aquatic life
2015
2030
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
16
BO
D (m
g/l)
BOD at different stations (simulation)!
BO
D (m
g/l)
Results
BOD > 7mg/l considered as not suitable for aquatic life
Month
2015
2030
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kp Kelapa Sugutamu IP Condet PA Maggarai
17
CO
D (m
g/l)
COD at different stations (simulation)!
CO
D (m
g/l)
Results
2015
2030
Month
18
Conclusions
The simulation results show that the pollution level of theCiliwung River is high and not suitable for aquatic life.
Alternative baseline scenarios can examine vulnerability ofwater qualities to different demographic, technological, &climatological/hydrological futures.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION!
19