The WTP Dilemma

Willingness to Pay Surveys, as they are called are designed to assess the mindset of a population on paying for a service provided under a certain project. Environmental Impact Assessment consultants use these to determine readiness of a population to accept a tariff system on a service, mostly potable water supplies. 

As Maldivian islands are small, there are no freshwater lakes of suitable quantities on islands to be used for daily utilities (yes, I am perfectly aware of freshwater ponds, or Kulhi, in some of the islands, but they are not suitable for daily use by an island community as far as I can tell). There, however is a freshwater lens in all the islands big enough to support a human community. These, unfortunately are not immune to extensive pumping and pollution. There are two main practices in Maldives which renders the said resource unsuitable for use as potable water. The first, disposal of raw sewage to the ground; this pollutes the groundwater, contamination of the lens by fecal bacteria and resulting build up of sulphur compounds in the water makes it smelly and a health hazard. Typical tradition in these island communities is to use rainwater for drinking and groundwater extracted from the freshwater lens for other daily utilities such as laundry, bathing and occasionally, cooking. The foul odor is of course a problem when this water is used for bathing and laundry. Bacterial content does have potential to cause skin diseases, urinary tract infections and digestive problems. In islands with higher population densities, groundwater is so polluted, it is unsuitable for household use. The second practice; using way too many water pumps. High levels of pumping cause freshwater lens to mix with saline layer underneath, causing groundwater salinization. This renders groundwater unsuitable for any use really. Rainwater is not a dependable resource due to its unpredictable nature. Hence, the ultimate "solution" is to opt for a reverse osmosis plant. By means of an island-wide pipe network, freshwater can be conveyed to households using a single plant. This, however is costly; hence the willingness to pay surveys. 

Operators of RO plants on island communities need income to continue operation. The most sensible answer to this problem is charging households for their water usage; but, how much should they pay? Fresh potable water is a basic human need. It should not be too expensive, but should be able to cover the operational cost at the very least. Ultimately, you come up with a tariff system based on operational cost and estimated water demand by the community. Finally, you see if the fee is acceptable to the community; so you go and ask them. 

When you go to an island to conduct a willingness to pay survey, you expect them to be well informed of the project. More often than not, majority of the people on the island do not even know about the project. That is very frustrating; because of something you say, the community may get angry at the island council, and who knows, Maldivians just love setting government buildings on fire and taking survey teams hostage demanding something unreasonable. Anyways, the point is, island councils and other responsible bodies should do their jobs properly. They were elected to serve as middlemen between the island community and government; it is their responsibility to inform general population what is going on. I seriously do not want to be held hostage just because island councilors are so goddamn lazy!

So what happens if you release untreated sewage to the marine environment?

Male' Swimming Tract Area(Source: Kamil Lukasik; google + )

Recently, I had been given the opportunity to analyze water quality results from tests conducted by a private firm close to sewage outfalls in Maldives. It is common knowledge disposal of raw sewage is 'bad' for the environment and human health. But is it really the case?

One of the cases at hand was that of the famous outfall near swimming track area in Male'. Unfortunately, I was not the one to design the sampling survey and I found it rather lacking, to say the least. One sample close to outfall (about 10m) was collected and tested for T. Coliform, F. Coliform, nitrates and phosphates. Even though I cannot reveal actual results due my agreement with our client, all I can say is, in terms of  mineral content of the sample, it was surprisingly low (within levels of unpolluted sea water; hence no cause for eutrophication). However, there were moderate amounts of fecal and total coliform. The question is, where exactly was the sample collected? According to the information I received, it was just outside the housereef, away from the swimming track. 

So is it bad to find F.coliform in this sample? Many studies exist on the affects of saltwater on fecal indicator bacteria (Anderson 2005, Anderson 1979, Barcia-Lara et al. 1991, Ferguson 2005) and scientists are in agreement that saltwater eliminates fecal indicator bacteria. Studies have shown a combination of the biological, chemical and physical makeup of saltwater all affect the presence of indicator bacteria (Anderson 2005). A study conducted by Iris Anderson shows that the higher the salinity, the more stressed the sample of E. coli becomes (Anderson 1979).So basically, saltwater kills fecal coliforms, if in appropriate limits. Therefore, it is safe to say, if the outfall is located in a suitable location (based on strength of currents in the area and amount of sewage released), there will not be any significant effect on the environment or people swimming close to it. So what about the one at Male' swimming track? Well, I am not sure. I need to know strength and direction of currents, a reliable water quality test result of effluent, a bunch of more sea water quality results at the outfall location. 

All I can say after this is, I wouldn't swim at the track if I were you... The available information suggest, the sample was collected from a location outside the area currents are carrying sewage, hence the reduced concentration of minerals; which also suggest, the area, currents are carrying most of the stuff released from the outfall would be the swimming track area... ouch! If there was a moderate amount of f. coliform in this sample, just how much would be in the swimming tract? Depends on the currents again; if currents are strong enough to carry the bacteria inside the swimming tract area fast enough before they are killed off from high salinity, there will be a lot of bacteria in that water and you seriously wouldn't wanna swim there.

What exactly are 'coliforms' in a water quality test? Total coliforms are just a group of rod-shaped Gram-negative non-spore bacteria which can ferment lactose with the production of acid and gas when incubated at 35-37 degrees. They are found in almost all aquatic environment, soil and on vegetation. They are present in feces of warm-blooded animal and are themselves not normally causes of serious illness. Their presence is used to indicate presence of other dangerous parasites/ bacteria. Fecal coliform is a subset of total coliform and is potentially hazardous to human health.The presence of Fecal Coliform bacteria or E. coli indicates contamination of water with fecal waste that may contain other more harmful or disease causing organisms. Ingesting significant amounts of water contaminated with these organisms can cause stomach and intestinal illness including diarrhea and nausea, and even lead to death. These effects may be more severe and possibly life threatening for babies, children, the elderly or people with immune deficiencies or other illnesses.

What about the environment? The most significant impact of releasing sewage to the marine environment would be that of increasing nutrient levels in the water; particularly nitrates, phosphates and such. This promotes plant growth and can trigger an algal bloom if in high concentrations; resulting in a significant reduction in dissolved oxygen level of the water at these locations. Consequently, marine life such as fish and coral could potentially die out rapidly from suffocation depending on the extent of oxygen depletion. This is also known as eutrophication. There is also potential for pollution of the the environment by contaminants such as heavy metals, detergents and similar compounds present in the sewage. These are harmful to wildlife though not as significant as eutrophication. In most cases, the concentration of these compounds/minerals in waste water are diluted by mixing with the water body. A good current and wave action at discharge location will dilute these compounds to low enough levels for them to be insignificant in the environment; hence no consequent adverse effect on the environment. However, in case of Male' the amount of sewage released to the environment and strength of currents at outfall locations suggest appropriate dilution rates are unlikely to occur, hence there is potential for severe environment deterioration at these locations.


Further water quality analysis and examination of the environment at outfall locations need to be carried out before going all ape-shit on the government. 


References;

• Anderson, I. C., Rhodes, M., and Kator, H. 1979. Sublethel Stress in Escherichia coli: a Function of    Salinity. Applied and Environmental Microbioloby. 38:1147-1152.
• Anderson, K.L.,Whitlock J. E. and Harwood, V. J. 2005. Persistence and Differential Survival of Fecal Indicator Bacteria in Subtropical Waters and Sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 71:3041-3048
•  Barcia-Lara, J., Menon, P., Servais, P and Billen, G. 1991. Mortality of Fecal Bacteria in Seawater. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 57:885-888
• Ferguson, D., Moore, D., Getrich, M. and Zhowandai, M. 2005. Enumeration and speciation of enterococci found in marine and intertidal sediments and coastal water in southern California. Journal of Applied Microbiology 99:598-608.

Meanwhile in Maldives.....

So for the past week or so, I have been working on an Environmental Monitoring Project. Some random resort decided their beach is eroding too much and they got way too much seagrass for their comfort and decided to do a major coastal modification project. They dredged an area within the inner lagoon and dumped a lot of sand onto the eroding beach. Also, they dug out a lot of seagrass around the island. Now; our job is to determine if impacts, adverse or positive were within tolerable/acceptable levels after the project has been carried out.
As majority of the work was carried out close to the island, the easiest way to assess the damage from this project was to analyze corals around the project site; the housereef. We placed permanent 1m by 1m quadrates at study sites. The idea was to examine changes in live coral community; changes in species composition, cover by live corals...etc. It was within expected outcomes that some amount of coral will die out due to high turbidity from dredging activities. What we are more interested is the recovery rate.
Anyways, so what we were doing for the past 2 years... I haven't got a clue. I got the project very recently and decided to spice things up with more technical jargon and perhaps a little bit more real information to help determine recovery rate and such. So to utilize the permanent quadrate to its full potential, I started out with simple coral cover analysis.

Try One:
Before going there let me explain one of the tools we use: CPCe
Basically, you take photo of the quadrate (the reef with the quadrate if you will) and use that photo to calculate area of the seabed covered by corals, dead corals, sand..etc..
To actually measure/identify/mark borders and calculate actual areas will be quite difficult if not impossible for large numbers of quadrates. So you take the photo and use random sampling thingie (automated within the program code) to place 20 random points on the photo. Then you classify the points; what is under each point. So you basically get a decent estimate of cover percentages by category.
So what I first did was use this method once to calculate cover percentage for live corals, dead corals and classify live corals to genus level.
So my colleague wrote the entire report and I was left to review it. While reviewing I noticed the results from CPCe analysis were very inaccurate so I investigated the underlying course. I realized it was merely due to sampling bias and if I repeat the process for about 5 times I would have a more accurate result. I did it and re-wrote the report.

Try Two:
While redoing the report with more accurate data, I realize we have more data/information than the eye meets. So I began digging deeper into the abyss of information.... I found many inconsistencies... unexplained variations.... and many more. So I began to dig even deeper... to find explanations for them... and I found them... most of it anyways... but the report which should have been about 20 pages long and done in about 1 day has become 100 pages long and taken me a whole week... now i am thinking this is too much information and I need to cut it down.... aaaaaah.