Nature Environment and Pollution Technology

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

GIS Based Evaluation and Management of Soil Reaction for Environmental and Agricultural Sustainability Around a Thermal Power Plant


Affiliations
1 Agricultural Training Centre & State Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute, Ramakrishna Mission, Narendrapur, Kolkata-700103, West Bengal, India
2 Deptt. of Earth and Environmental Studies, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, 713209, West Bengal, India
3 Deptt. of Agronomy, Bidhan Chandra KrishiViswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, Nadia, 741252, West Bengal, India
4 Deptt. of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur-713209, West Bengal, India
 

The alkaline fly ash (pH 8.3-8.6) emitting from Kolaghat Thermal Power Plant (KTPP), West Bengal, India, effectively renders the soil reaction (pH 7.58-8.01) of the adjacent land. The soil-fly ash mixtures predict the increase in pH influenced by fly ash. At 5% level of significance within 4 km from KTPP, calculated t-values exceed the tabulated ones which ascertain that the fly ash affects the soil reaction. Temporal soil reactions (2011, 2013 and 2015) show the highest change (12.3%) followed by 11.4% and 11.3% in the adjacent areas within 4 km. The probable soil pH of the affected area is estimated by the developed equation, Soil pHn+r= soil pHn + 1.09127 x10-5x r x (dm - di) x c. Here ‘n’ indicates year and ‘r’ represents the addition of year; dm denotes maximum distance of affected area and di, distance within affected area in km; ‘c’ indicates capacity of thermal power plant in mega watt. The functional logic of GIS for estimation of lime requirement is y1i = 3 +(6.7- xij)x10) and for gypsum requirement is y2i = 0.021x Xik (xil - xim) ton per hectare, where i stands for circle position; j, for pH of soil-buffer suspension of ith circle, k, for CEC of ith circle; l, for initial ESP of ith circle; m, for desirable ESP of ith circle. For soil reaction management, GIS Model recommends application of gypsum (1-2 ton hectare-1) to abate the additional impact of fly ash shedding yearly and liming of CaCO3 at the rate of 1.8-3.0 ton hectare-1 is suggested to the areas outside of the impact zone for environmental and agricultural sustainability.

Keywords

Fly Ash, Thermal Power Plant, Soil Reaction, GIS Model, Agricultural Sustainability, Environmental Sustainability.
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Adak, S., Adhikari, K. and Brahmachari, K. 2016. GIS-based evaluation of crop suitability for agricultural sustainability around Kolaghat thermal power plant, India. Journal of Environmental Biology, 37 (5): 905-912.

  • Adriano, D.C., Weber, J., Bolan, N.S., Paramasivam, S., Koo, B.J. and Sajwan, K.S. 2002. Effects of high rates of coal fly ash on soil, turf grass, and groundwater quality. Water Air and Soil Pollution, 139(1-4): 365-385.

  • Alphan, H. 2003. Land-use change and urbanization of Adana, Turkey. Land Degradation & Development, 14(6): 575-586.

  • Basu, M., Pande, M., Bhadoria, P.B.S. and Mahaptra, S.C. 2009. Potential fly-ash utilization in agriculture: A global review. Progress in Natural Science, 19(10): 1173-1186.

  • Brady, N.C. and Weil, R.R. 2012. Nature and Properties of Soil. Pearson Education Publication, 14th Edition, pp. 372-375.

  • Burrough P.A. 1986. Principles of Geographical Information Systems for Land Resources Assessment. Oxford University Press. New York.

  • Burrough, P.A. and McDonnell, R.A. 1998. Principles of Geographical Information Systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 327.

  • Dasgupta, A. and Paul, S. 2011. Fly ash and its impact on land: a case study of Kolaghat thermal power plant, Purba Medinipur, West Bengal. Indian Journal of Spatial Science, 11(2): 1-11.

  • Freund, J.E. and Perles, B.M. 2006. Modern Elementary Statistics. Fourth Edition, Prentice Hall, New Delhi, India.

  • Gomez, A.A., Swere Kelly, D.E., Syers, J.K. and Coughlan, K.J. 1996. Measuring sustainability at farm level. In: Methods for Assessing Soil Quality. SSSA, Special publication 49, Madison, USA.

  • Gond, D.P., Singh, S., Pal, A. and Tewary, B.K. 2013. Growth, yield and metal residues in Solanum melongena growth in fly ash amended soil. Journal of Environmental Biology, 34(3): 539-544.

  • Jackson, N.L.R. 1976. Soil Chemical Analysis. Practice-Hall of India Private limited, New Delhi.

  • Hesse, P.R. 1971. A Text Book of Soil Chemical Analysis. John Murry, London.

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) 1976. A framework for land evaluation. Soils Bulletin 32, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.

  • Kapetsky, J.M. and Travaglia, C. 1995. Geographical information systems and remote sensing: an overview of their present and potential applications in aquaculture. In: Nambiar, K.P.P., Singh, T. (Eds.), AquaTech’94: Aquaculture Towards the 21st Century. INFOFISH, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 187-208.

  • Lichtfouse, E., Navarrete, M. and Debaeke, P. 2009. Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 1, Springer, EDP Sciences.

  • Mishra, S.K. and Mohanty, S.K. 2010. Site specific conservation plan for thermal power plant in Naraj of Cuttack district, Orissa. Tata Power.

  • Patil, S.A. and Katpatal, Y.B. 2008. Impact assessment of coal mines in Erai watershed of Chandrapur district using geoinformatics. Journal of Environ. Science & Engg., 50(4): 271-276.

  • Rossiter, D.G. 1995. Economic land evaluation: why and how. Soil Use and Management, 11: 132-140.

  • Schoonover, W.R. 1952. Examinations of Soils for Alkali. University of California Extension Service, Berkeley, California, USA. (Mimeographed).

  • Singh, J., Agrawal, M., and Narayan D. 1995. Changes in soil characteristics around coal-fired power plant. Environment International, 21(1): 93-102.

  • Sharma, S.K. and Kalra, N. 2006. Effect of fly ash incorporation on soil properties and productivity of crops: A review. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 65: 383-390.

  • Shoemaker, H.E., McLean, E.O. and Pratt, P.F. 1961. Buffer methods of determining lime requirements of soils with appreciable amounts of extractable aluminum. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc., 25: 274-277.


Abstract Views: 425

PDF Views: 0




  • GIS Based Evaluation and Management of Soil Reaction for Environmental and Agricultural Sustainability Around a Thermal Power Plant

Abstract Views: 425  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Subhas Adak
Agricultural Training Centre & State Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute, Ramakrishna Mission, Narendrapur, Kolkata-700103, West Bengal, India
Kalyan Adhikari
Deptt. of Earth and Environmental Studies, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur, 713209, West Bengal, India
Koushik Brahmachari
Deptt. of Agronomy, Bidhan Chandra KrishiViswavidyalaya, Mohanpur, Nadia, 741252, West Bengal, India
Soumya Bhattacharyya
Deptt. of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Durgapur-713209, West Bengal, India

Abstract


The alkaline fly ash (pH 8.3-8.6) emitting from Kolaghat Thermal Power Plant (KTPP), West Bengal, India, effectively renders the soil reaction (pH 7.58-8.01) of the adjacent land. The soil-fly ash mixtures predict the increase in pH influenced by fly ash. At 5% level of significance within 4 km from KTPP, calculated t-values exceed the tabulated ones which ascertain that the fly ash affects the soil reaction. Temporal soil reactions (2011, 2013 and 2015) show the highest change (12.3%) followed by 11.4% and 11.3% in the adjacent areas within 4 km. The probable soil pH of the affected area is estimated by the developed equation, Soil pHn+r= soil pHn + 1.09127 x10-5x r x (dm - di) x c. Here ‘n’ indicates year and ‘r’ represents the addition of year; dm denotes maximum distance of affected area and di, distance within affected area in km; ‘c’ indicates capacity of thermal power plant in mega watt. The functional logic of GIS for estimation of lime requirement is y1i = 3 +(6.7- xij)x10) and for gypsum requirement is y2i = 0.021x Xik (xil - xim) ton per hectare, where i stands for circle position; j, for pH of soil-buffer suspension of ith circle, k, for CEC of ith circle; l, for initial ESP of ith circle; m, for desirable ESP of ith circle. For soil reaction management, GIS Model recommends application of gypsum (1-2 ton hectare-1) to abate the additional impact of fly ash shedding yearly and liming of CaCO3 at the rate of 1.8-3.0 ton hectare-1 is suggested to the areas outside of the impact zone for environmental and agricultural sustainability.

Keywords


Fly Ash, Thermal Power Plant, Soil Reaction, GIS Model, Agricultural Sustainability, Environmental Sustainability.

References