No abstract

Available online xxxKeywords: Radionuclide Uranium Radiological risk Toxicity Laser a b s t r a c tIn the present investigations, Laser Fluorimetry technique has been used for the microanalysis of uranium content in drinking water samples collected from different sources like the hand pumps, tube wells of various depths from wide range of locations in the four districts of SW-Punjab, India. The purpose of this study was to investigate the uranium concentration levels of ground water being used for drinking purposes and to determine its health effects, if any, to the local population of this region. Corresponding radiological and chemical risks have also been calculated for the uranium concentrations in ground water samples. Some other heavy elements have also been analysed using the Atomic Absorption Spectrometry. In this region, uranium concentration in 498 drinking water samples has been found to vary between 0.5e579 mgl À1 with an average of 73.5 mgl À1 . Data analysis revealed that 338 of 498 samples had uranium concentration higher than recommended safe limit of 30 mgl À1 (WHO, 2011) while 216 samples exceeded the threshold of 60 mgl À1 recommended by AERB, DAE, India, 2004.

Testing of groundwater used for drinking for arsenic has been undertaken more widely by state governments in several states of India in recent years with the support of UNICEF. Available data for five states are collated in this paper and this provides the most up-to-date picture of areas known to be affected by arsenic in groundwater in the Indian portion of the Ganges-Brahmaputra river basin. In West Bengal, water from 132,262 government installed handpumps in 8 districts has been tested and overall 25.5% of samples were found to contain arsenic at concentrations greater than 50 microgL(-1) and 57.9% at concentrations greater than 10 microgL(-1). On the banks of the Brahmaputra in Assam, to date, samples from 5,729 government handpump sources in 22 districts have been tested for arsenic. Overall, samples from 6.3% of sources were found to contain arsenic at concentrations greater than 50 microgL(-1) and 26.1% at concentrations greater than 10 microgL(-1). In Bihar, on the River Ganges upstream of West Bengal, 66,623 sources from 11 districts have been tested and water samples from 10.8% of sources were found to contain arsenic at concentrations greater than 50 microgL(-1) and 28.9% at concentrations greater than 10 microgL(-1). Upstream of Bihar in Uttar Pradesh, home of the Taj Mahal, to date water samples from 20,126 government-installed handpump sources have been tested. As a result 2.4% of the samples tested were found to contain arsenic at concentrations greater than 50 microgL(-1) and 21.5% at concentrations greater than 10 microgL(-1). Finally in one district of Jharkhand, lying on the Ganges alluvial plain between Bihar and West Bengal, 9,007 sources have been tested and water samples from 3.7% of sources were found to contain arsenic at concentrations greater than 50 microgL(-1) and 7.5% at concentrations greater than 10 microgL(-1). State governments have adopted different sampling strategies and these are described in this paper. Testing is ongoing in several states and the complete picture is yet to emerge in some areas.

No abstract

No abstract