Ultraviolet technology has potential to treat ditch water for irrigation.
The availability of irrigation
water for food crops is crucial to berry and vegetable farmers; but, before it
can be used, irrigation water—and the Ultraviolet (UV) system to treat it—must
meet regulatory agency standards. In fact, the relationship between water demand
and water safety always requires a delicate balancing that must include
affordable treatment solutions, Lynn Lashuk, of the BC (British Columbia)
Agriculture Council, points out.
BC’s agricultural credentials are
quite impressive: According to a 2006 Statistics Canada census, the region
logged $2.7 billion in farm receipts and a farm area growth rate of 9.6% (well
above the 0.1% national average). Within this context, it makes sense that the
Agriculture Environment Partnership Initiative awarded the BC Vegetable
Marketing Commission a one-year $18,000 research grant in July 2007 to enable
the commission to evaluate the effectiveness of UV technology in treating ditch
water for agricultural irrigation. More specifically, the commission hopes to
demonstrate UV’s effectiveness in reducing microbial pathogen levels in
irrigation water, thus allowing it to meet the Provincial (British Columbia)
water-quality guidelines.
In 2002, the BC Ministry of Water,
Air, and Land Protection tested the water in and around Surrey, BC. The results
indicated that E. coli levels
exceeded Provincial irrigation water-quality guidelines in the Nicomekl River,
which serves as the irrigation water supply for vegetables and berries in the
Cloverdale area. According to Stephanie Tam, from the Ministry of Agriculture
and Lands in Abbotsford, BC, those E.
coli levels “could potentially create a human health hazard. Preliminary
water samples in several areas in the Lower Mainland, including Matsqui Prairie,
where surface water is the primary source of irrigation water supply, showed
similar results.”
According to the Ministry of
Agriculture, Food, and Fisheries, many of BC’s surface water supplies contain
pathogens that constitute a risk to human health. Agricultural drainage ditches
often supply irrigation and crop wash-water, but these supplies are particularly
prone to poor quality. Of course, all surface water sources can be contaminated
with pathogens from septic fields, animal manure, milk house wastes, and
wildlife.
Because irrigation (or surface)
water is subjected to contamination from many sources, there is an extensive and
diverse list of microorganisms in the aquatic environment that makes
identification and monitoring complicated and expensive, says Lashuk. To
simplify matters, fecal coliforms are used as an easily detectable indicator
organism for overall fecal contamination, because these organisms are present
only when other pathogens are present. This method helps distinguish false tests
and aids in similar responses to the pathogens of interest.
 |
 |
Photos by H20 Irrigations |
Trial results proved the UV system was effective in reducing the levels of E. coli and fecal coliforms in the ditch water, meeting Provincial guidelines. |
The drawbacks of using fecal
coliforms include the fact that these tests detect both potentially harmful
bacteria like
E. coli and less
harmful bacteria. If effluent sources derive from dairy farms or industrial food
processing, there’s a chance the effluent may indicate a high-positive fecal
coliform test without the presence of fecal matter. In addition, fecal coliforms
will not identify pathogens of non-fecal origin and are not useful as indicators
for pathogens responsible for eye, ear, nose, throat, or skin infections, or the
presence of viruses, protozoa, or worms.
E. coli is also frequently used as an
indicator because it is more specific to human fecal contamination than any
other group of organisms. The correct combination of UV light intensity,
duration of exposure, and extent of penetration through the water can destroy E. coli.
Applying Ultraviolet Light
Although part of the natural light
spectrum, ultraviolet light is invisible to the human eye. Nevertheless, it can
destroy microorganisms such as bacteria, fungi, and algae. Sunlight does not
contain ultraviolet light in sufficient quantities to kill pathogens quickly; so
high-intensity UV lamps are used to kill pathogens in a shorter amount of
time.
The measurement of intensity is
microwatt per square centimeter and the factors that affect intensity are lamp
output and water quality. Regularly cleaning the quartz sleeve and annually
replacing lamps helps maintain peak lamp output. Monitoring equipment can also
be added to ensure that proper outputs are maintained.
The flow rate determines the
necessary exposure time required. Increasing the flow rate decreases the
exposure time and dosage, which requires higher-intensity lamps to ensure
effective treatment.
Proper dosage can be determined by
multiplying the light intensity by the exposure time. Increasing either requires
a corresponding increase in dosage. The measurement for dosage is
microwatt-seconds per square centimeter. According to the Ministry, the standard
to disinfect water contaminated by bacteria and viruses is 38,000
microwatt-seconds per square centimeter, although the dosage required will vary
according to the species.
One challenge of treating water is
that light penetration is limited by the quality of the water. If the water
contains high levels of suspended solids or dissolved organics, or does not have
good clarity, light penetration will be limited. In addition, dissolved organics
have a high ultraviolet-absorption capacity and iron can reduce light intensity
by coating quartz sleeves. To improve clarity and ensure adequate penetration of
UV light through the entire flow profile, filtration of surface water is
necessary.
Putting UV to the Test
When the Ministry of Agriculture
approached the British Columbia Vegetable Marketing Commission in 2003, the BC
Vegetable Marketing Commission agreed to fund (in part) and administer funding
for research, with the expectation of discovering that UV technologies to reduce
microbial pathogen levels are 99.9% efficient.
Other funding came from the BC
Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, the BC Blueberry Council, the Lower Mainland
Horticultural Improvement Association, and the BC Agriculture
Council—Agriculture Environment Partnership Initiative. In addition, the
participating farm owners (one vegetable farmer in Cloverdale and blueberry
farmers in Matsqui Prairie, who share the same surface water and UV system) paid
approximately one-quarter of the cost in exchange for being allowed to keep the
equipment.
“It started with a problem
encountered by a spinach grower in Cloverdale,” explains Jack Wessel of the BC
Vegetable Marketing Commission. “That caused us to look at water quality.”
Initial water testing was
conducted over that summer as the BC Vegetable Marketing Commission sought
solutions. “When a lot of green leafy vegetable growers experienced water
problems, it made us ask what they could do,” says Wessel. “One answer we got
was ‘don’t irrigate for two weeks,’ but that wasn’t practical. We wanted
practical solutions.”
When the Ministry of Agriculture
identified the UV light treatment as a potential method of reducing microbial
pathogen levels, the BC Vegetable Marketing Commission agreed to explore the
possibility. It promptly selected growers to participate in the study, as well
as the time period for the research, but left evaluation of the program to the
Ministry of Agriculture.
Project Profile
H2O Irrigations installed UV
treatment systems at both locations. Owner Doug Jarvie explains the design
criteria.
Ditch water passes through a set
of two sand filters to separate out particulates. Sand filters are required
prior to UV treatment to ensure maximum transmission of ultraviolet light
through the water. The filters are designed not to exceed a flow rate of 15
gallon per minute per square foot of bed area. After being filtered, the water
is estimated to have a transmission level of 50%.
Next, the water proceeds through a
screen filter, although Jarvie says it’s not strictly necessary and is included
mainly as a precaution in case of a failure with the sand filters. The filtered
water then passes through a set of 12 UV lamps. Turbulent flow is required
through the UV units; if the flow is smooth, microorganisms may be able to pass
through the outlet without having sufficient contact time.
For crop washing facilities, an
ultraviolet dosage of 40,000 microwatt-seconds per square centimeter is
recommended. Wash water still requires chlorine or chlorine dioxide, because the
UV process cleans water but doesn’t kill bacteria, which will regrow, Jarvie
notes. Wash water must be 100% bacteria-free. However, before being discharged
into the environment, all the residual chlorine must be removed.
Irrigation water doesn’t need to
be completely free of bacteria. Jarvie indicates that bacteria levels must below
a count of 70%, and that it’s “easy to get below 70.” For irrigation system
treatment, a UV dosage of 16,000 microwatt-seconds per square centimeter is
advised. Irrigation water treatment should be started 30 days prior to
harvest.
Working with the manufacturer,
Jarvie designed and tested the systems installed on the farms in the project. He
says they’re not difficult to install and that if designed and sized properly,
they’re very effective. To determine the proper size, he checks water samples
for clarity. The necessary size of the unit depends on the flow rate, light
intensity, and water quality.
Maintenance is equally simple.
“They need to be cleaned every couple weeks,” recommends Jarvie.
Smaller units can be easily
disassembled for cleaning, but bigger systems feature an automatic cleaning
system to clean the dirt that sticks to the glass tubes, using non-toxic citric
acid, which can safely be released into the environment. “It’s too difficult to
disassemble the larger systems,” he adds.
Spatial requirements are also
minimal. Although it depends on the water flow, most need only an 8 x 8 pump
house. “They don’t take a lot of space,” reiterates Jarvie. “The sand filter
takes less space than the UV unit, which is 12 inches in diameter and about 6
feet long.”
Rough Waters Precede Smooth
Sailing
Water samples were taken pre-UV
treatment and post-UV treatment weekly from the end of May to mid-September.
Trial results indicated that the UV system was effective in reducing the levels
of E. coli and fecal coliforms in the
ditch water, meeting Provincial irrigation water guidelines.
One concern during the study was
that other factors might mask the true effectiveness of the UV technology; for
example, leaks along the distribution lines in certain areas of the field
causing some levels of contamination of the treated water or water turbidity
masking the UV lamps, reducing treatment efficiency. According to Tam, “It is
very difficult to try to fix or even to locate where the leaks occur when you
are dealing with permanent pipes installed underground.”
Other issues arose because the
operation and maintenance of the UV facility was the sole responsibility of farm
owner. If the UV lamps weren’t cleaned regularly, the treatment efficiency was
reduced. If the sand filters weren’t flushed regularly, microbial growth might
occur within them, thereby increasing the microbial pathogen levels in the water
after being filtered, but prior to going through the UV lamps. The UV dosage
needed depends on the quality of the untreated water. If microbial growth is
allowed to occur in the sand filters, the UV dosage in the system might not be
enough to treat the water to its full effectiveness.
In fact, maintenance did somewhat
affect the results. Water samples were taken at both farms during three
consecutive irrigation seasons from 2003 to 2005, inclusive. The results met
Provincial guidelines, except when UV lamps were clouded or out of order. Tam
says they learned that check-ups of treated water should be performed
periodically—as often as once every two weeks during the irrigation season, and
especially after rainfalls or non-irrigation season. The project results
indicate “when special maintenance of materials in sand filters or UV lamps
should be done,” she concludes.
Rewards
“Two farms in the Lower Mainland
now have good quality water for crop washing and for irrigating their crops that
are eaten raw, as long as the UV systems are maintained regularly,” reports Tam.
She cautions growers, however, that “purchasing and maintaining a UV system is
costly,” but emphasizes that they need to be aware of the fact that using
untreated surface water that might be contaminated with microbial pathogens can
potentially put public health in jeopardy. She urges growers to make every
effort to ensure that their crops are safe for public consumption.
Jarvie confirms that the capital
investment cost of the system is high, but says long term, the solution is
cost-effective, especially considering the alternatives.
“Actually, there aren’t a lot of
options: You either add something to kill the bacteria, or you take out the
bacteria at the source,” he says. “We recommend against adding large amounts of
chlorine because chlorine byproducts can end up in the soil. Why add something
that has to be taken out?”
In addition, he notes that a UV
system requires a one-time investment and minimal maintenance costs, whereas
chlorine applications will add annual costs.
One farm with a need for a large
volume of wash water had two options prior to installation of a UV system: buy
city water or truck in water. Both were expensive options, Jarvie says. In that
case, the UV system paid for itself in one month.
He doesn’t do that kind of work
any more, claiming his small operation couldn’t keep up with the heavy demand,
but in a two-year period, Jarvie installed at least eight UV systems. “The first
farm installation I did required a lot of research. It had been shut down due to
an outbreak in its spinach crop caused by contaminated ditch water,” he says.
“You can’t have bacteria in irrigation water.”
Ditch water for irrigation
purposes isn’t the only successful application of UV light treatment systems.
Using the UV systems to treat wastewater is “very common,” adds Jarvie.
“It’s used for sewage treatment
because it doesn’t have to be a pressurized unit in a closed chamber,” he says.
You can have an open channel to oxygenate the water. That allows it to grow
bacteria to break the sewage down prior to UV treatment.”
Wessel indicates that because
there have been no recent incidents regarding water quality, there haven’t been
any additional tests of UV treatment in BC, although he does mention related
experiments conducted in Ontario to evaluate the number of hours of sunlight
required to kill bacteria.
“It’s
terrible to say, but since we haven’t had any incidents there hasn’t been any
focus on the issue—although I’m sure it will be a matter of increasing concern
in years to come,” he says.