Water is for life, not controversy

RESEARCHERS have tested 120 water samples from Chattogram WASA and identified four types of Trihalomethanes (THMs). Levels were found to be even higher in some samples during the summer.

The researchers also assessed the potential cancer risk associated with long-term consumption of water containing these levels of THMs.

The calculations indicate an estimated excess cancer risk for approximately 426 out of every million people.

However, this does not mean that they will definitely develop cancer. But it is merely an estimate of the potential risk associated with long-term exposure to specific levels of the chemical.

Research indicates that THMs are not directly added to the water; rather, they can form as by-products when the chlorine used to destroy microorganisms reacts with natural organic matter present in the water.

The solution is not to stop using chlorine; rather, there is a greater need for integrated monitoring of water sources, organic matter content, chlorine levels, and the resulting THM concentrations.

Although WASA has raised objections regarding the methodology of the study in question, the authority has admitted that it lacks the specialized equipment required to test for THMs or chloroform in its laboratories.

In the developed world, water safety is not limited merely to the treatment plant; rather, it is monitored right up to the consumer’s tap.

Many countries treat consumer taps as critical testing points, adhering to comprehensive chemical and microbiological standards.

Their regulatory frameworks also include provisions for reviewing and updating these standards whenever new risks emerge.

In contrast, the reality here is quite the opposite; there seems to be no end to complaints regarding the quality of WASA’s water, ranging from foul odors to contamination by microbes and chemicals.

At one point, a controversy even arose regarding claims of supplying “100 percent potable water.”

Subsequently, facing protests and human-chain demonstrations, the WASA authorities were compelled to acknowledge that their water was not directly drinkable.

Regrettably, even after this, WASA’s water failed to become free from contamination or controversy.

In fact, persistent and harmful chemicals, such as PFAS, have very recently been detected in the supply. Water is a fundamental human need; it is not a matter of charity or a favour.

Therefore, merely demanding the supply of ‘safe water’ from WASA is insufficient; emphasis must also be placed on the scientific testing essential for ensuring safety.

Sincere attention must be paid to regular testing, from the source to the consumer’s tap, the establishment of national standards for harmful chemicals, the use of modern laboratories, and independent oversight.

When will WASA realize that the public wants truly safe water, not just promises?