International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Risk Assessment of Natural Radionuclides in Surface and Ground Water of Oil and Gas
Producing Communities, Rivers State, Nigeria

Irunkwor, T. C1, Omoruyi, C. I2 and Ogboi, K. C3

1,2Department of Environmental Management and Toxicology, University of Delta, Agbor, Delta State, Nigeria
3Centre for Environmental Management and Control, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Enugu Campus

DOI: https://doi.org/10.56293/IJASR.2022.5445

IJASR 2022
VOLUME 5
ISSUE 5 SEPTEMBER - OCTOBER ISSN: 2581-7876
Abstract: The natural radioactivity and radiological health risk associated with the use of water from hand-dug
wells, tap/boreholes and river/creeks in three communities with history of oil spillage, gas flaring, oil bunkering and
operation of illegal artisanal oil refining activities in Rivers State, Nigeria was here assessed and measured with
gamma ray spectroscopy. The results showed that the mean activity concentration of water samples for hand-dug
well water ranged from 11.94±1.12 to 12.77± 1.12Bq/l for 238U, 7.88±1.05 to 9.20±1.82Bq/l for 232Th and
13.50±0.62 to 20.13±3.88Bq/l for 40K. The mean activity concentration for the tap/borehole water ranged from
2.42±0.45Bq/l to 5.31±0.80Bq/l for 238U, 1.02±1.01 to 2.24±0.90Bq/l for 232Th and 9.71±5.04 to 11.73±3.77Bq/l
for 40K. The 238U, 232Th and 40K activity concentrations in the river/creek waters ranged respectively from
6.81±0.80 to 8.82±1.20Bq/l, 4.25±0.65 to 9.52±1.16Bq/l and 25.01±3.23 to 30.03±1.96Bq/l. These values are
higher than the mean activity concentrations of the 3 radionuclides in the control samples and some are higher than
the international permissible standards. Results further revealed that there was statistically significant difference at
p<0.05 in the mean variations of the activity concentrations of natural radionuclides in the water supply sources
within the three communities and the control. The committed annual effective dose and excess lifetime cancer risks
are radiologically higher than the permissible limits. Therefore, children and adults in the three communities are
susceptible to high dose related diseases and have high chances of contracting cancer when water is ingested from
the three water supply sources since the committed annual effective dose and excess lifetime cancer risk are
respectively over 1.16 times and 8 times higher than the UNSCEAR and USEPA international permissible limits of
0.29mSv/y and 1x10-4 mSv/y.

Keywords: Artisanal oil Refining, Committed Annual Effective Dose, Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk, Oil Bunkering,
Radionuclides
1. Introduction

Water as a universal solvent is a very important parameter of environmental science because it is indispensible to
human life. Water sources like rivers, springs, wells, boreholes and other fresh water bodies provide water for
drinking and domestic purposes including cooking and will generally constitute an exposure pathway for
contaminants to reach the population (Fasunwon et. al., 2008). Water, no matter its source does not exist in pure
form for appreciable length of time in nature. Even while waterfalls as rain, it picks up small amount of
contaminants from the atmosphere and moves as it filters through the ground (Ajayi et. al., 2012). Those
contaminants may be natural or anthropogenic including biological, chemical, physical and radiological impurities
such as industrial and commercial solvents, heavy metals, acid salts, and radioactive materials (Ononugbo and Ogan,
2017). Naturally occurring radionuclides are present in the food we eat, in the water we drink and use for domestic
purposes through weathering and recycling of terrestrial minerals and rocks. Radionuclides may be deposited from
the air or may be released to the water through oil spill in surface water, oil exploration and exploitation that takes
place in an environment and/or human activities such as bunkering and illegal crude method of crude oil refining
along river course. Radionuclides may also be released to water from the ground through erosion where they are
washed away from soils and seeps into underground water. Water becomes contaminated as it picks up radioactive
materials from the surrounding rocks, soils or cracked cement as it flows past (Ononugbo and Ogan, 2017).
Domestic sewage, feedlots and surface runoff, and other pollution sources get surface and groundwater
contaminated. The subterranean aquifers may become contaminated in areas where the subsurface geology permits

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

189
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

rapid downward movement of water sources from the surface or where groundwater/well water sources are tapped
near the surface (Jibiri et. al., 2010). Ingestion of radionuclides through drinking water and food intake accounts for
a substantial part of the average radiation doses to various organs of the body and also represents one of the
important pathways for long-term health considerations (UNSCEAR, 2000). Long-term exposure to radionuclide
like thorium through inhalation and ingestion has severe health effects such as chronic lung diseases and bone
cancer, bone weakening, cranial leucopoenia, and necrosis of the mouth and nasal tumors (Jibiri et. al., 2011). While
long-term exposure to radium increases the risk of developing several diseases like lymphoma, bone cancer and
diseases that affect the formation of blood (leukemia and aplastic anemia), lung cancer, cancer of the pancreas,
cataracts, sterility and atrophy of the kidney (Taskin et. al., 2009).

Between 2016 and 2021 Rivers State which is the oil and gas hub of Nigeria experienced air pollution in the form of
dispersed particulate matter known as black soot. This soot contains radionuclides and when deposited in any of the
environmental media, could elevate the concentration of naturally occurring radionuclides in the environment.
Naku (2022) asserted that the black soot were products of emission from operators of illegal crude oil refining in all
the oil bunkering centres located within the communities in the State. Aside from being a threat to air quality
leading to respiratory diseases, the soot can affect farming activities as acid rainfall could potentially impact on crop
yield and harvest. Again, the soot poses a threat to animals, aquatic lives, as well as rivers and streams which are
sources of water supply for most households in the communities rendering the waters unclean arising from
deposition of soot into these surface water bodies (Alikor, 2022). The inadvertent discharges of petroleum
hydrocarbons or petroleum derived wastes streams from activities of oil and gas production operating companies in
the communities are toxic to the coastal waters, soils and sediments near the discharge point (Azpecza and Szabo,
1988). Besides surface water bodies, groundwater is very important as it accounts for about 88% of safe drinking
water in rural areas where population is widely dispersed and the infrastructure needed for treatment and
transportation of surface water does not exist (Amakom, 2007). Hand-dug wells however, are still the most
common source of groundwater in rural communities, and a large percentage of the rural population depends on
these wells for their water supply (USEPA, 2006). River water also serves as a major source of drinking water in the
rural area for the human race, thus it is important to investigate the levels of radionuclide element in river water
(Ajayi et. al., 2012). This study therefore assesses the radionuclides content in the different sources of water for
drinking and domestic use by the inhabitants of three communities with history of crude oil spill, oil
bunkering/illegal oil refining activities, and to evaluate the radiological health risk associated with these activities
when water from these different sources is ingested by the inhabitants.

2. The Study Area

The study areas are three communities comprising Eleme, Bunu-Tai and Bodo. Eleme lies within Latitude
04o46’37.6”N and Longitude 007o07’51.0”E, Bunu-Tai lies within Latitude 04o45’41.0”N and Longitude
007o14’29.4”E while Bodo lies within Latitude 04 o44’46.2’’N and Longitude 007o06’32.1’’E. The three communities
respectively belong to Eleme Local Government Area (LGA), Tai LGA and Gokana LGA of Rivers State, Nigeria
(Figure 1). The general topography is relatively flat lying and consists of terrestrial and marine environment. Due to
previous crude oil spills that cover the land and surface water bodies, the terrestrial environment has patchy
regenerating vegetation which consisted mostly of scanty and secondary type residual grasses while the surface water
bodies have oil films with dark to brownish colouration. Each of the three communities is within 1,000m radius of
the spilled sites, gas flaring at flow stations, oil bunkering and illegal artisanal oil refining activities.

Figure 1: Map of the Study Area (NGSA, 2010)

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

190
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

2.1 Regional Geology

The study area falls within the Niger Delta region which is made up of thick clastic sedimentary sequence with age
ranging from Eocene to Recent and it sits astride the Niger flood plains, which overlies the Benin formation that is
often called the coastal plain sand (Tattam, 1943). This formation consists predominantly of coarse grained sandy
soils with few shale intercalations. The unconsolidated, highly porous sands of the Benin formation is a fresh water
bearing sands zone (Amajor, 1991), and all aquifers in this region are located within this lithio-stratigraphic unit. The
Benin formation comprises multiple layers of clay, clay conglomerates, peat and/or lignite all of variable thickness
and texture and covered by overburden soil (Short and Stauble, 1967).

3. Materials and Methods

3.1 Sample Collection and Preparation

Eight water samples were collected from three communities with history of crude oil spill, gas flaring, illegal
artisanal oil refining and oil bunkering activities (table 1 and figure 2). The simple random sampling method was
adopted. Water samples were collected from rivers/creeks, taps/boreholes and hand-dug wells that serve as
community water supply sources. Selection of sample locations was based on proximity of water source to spill site
and industrial areas. Three water samples used as control were collected from river, tap/borehole and hand-dug well
from non-oil bearing communities (ie with no history of oil production and oil spillages) located at 55km away from
Ogoniland. Well water samples were collected manually in the early hours of the day while river/creek water
samples were collected near the middle of the water body in the early hours using wading gear and a 2-metre
extendable metal grab. Samples were collected against the flow of water by submerging a water container to a depth
of 10-20 cm under the surface. Tap/borehole water samples were collected with treated containers at laminar flow
rate after first turn on at full capacity for 5 minutes to purge the plumbing system of any water that might
contaminate the sample to reduce radon loss.

To minimize contamination, the collection of the water samples from the three water supply sources was done each
with 2-litre container. The 2-litres containers were first rinsed three times with water and acid washed with
20ml±1ml Conc. HNO3 before using it to collect the samples so as to avoid adsorption of the radionuclides on the
walls of the containers. For each sample, about 1% airspace was left for thermal expansion before it was tightly
sealed and taken to the laboratory to store for 30 days to ensure that no radon loss occurs, and to reach a state of
circular equilibrium between radium isotopes and their daughters. Samples` were then transferred into a 1-litre
Marinelli beaker after filtration to remove all solid particles in the water. It was further processed through
evaporation until 0.5 litres remained in the beaker and was then stored in a desiccator to allow it cool and to prevent
it from absorbing moisture.

Figure 2: Map Showing Water Sampling Points in the Study Area

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

191
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Table 1: Communities where water samples were collected

Community River Water Tap/borehole Hand-dug well

Bunu-Tai Oo-a-naana River Bunu-Tai Tapwater Bunu-Tai Well
Bodo Sugi-Bodo River Bodo Tapwater Bodo Well
Eleme Ochanai creek Alode Tapwater -

3.2 Sample Analysis

The activity of natural radionuclides of the prepared water samples were counted at the Centre for Energy Research
and Training, Zaria with gamma ray spectrometer detector for 29000 seconds at 900V to produce strong peaks at
gamma emmiting energies so as to assess the natural radionuclide contents in the water samples. Due to the smaller
life time of the daughter radionuclides in the decay series of 232Th and 238U, the activities of 238U was determined
from the average activities of 214Pb at 352kev and 214Bi at 609Kev while that of 232Th was determined from average
activities of the decay products of 208Ti at 583kev and 228Ac at 911Kev. The activity of 40K content was determined
from strong peaks at gamma emitting energies of 1,460Kev (1.460 MeV). The background spectra measured under
the same conditions for both the standard and sample measurements were used to correct the calculated sample
activity concentrations. The activity concentration (Cw) in Bq/l of 238U, 232Th and 40K in the water samples was
calculated after subtracting decay correction using the expression:

Cw (Bq/l) = Ca ………………………………………………………….. (1)

ɛy x Ms x tc x Pγ

Where: Cw is the sample concentration, Ca is the net peak area of a peak at energy, ɛy is the efficiency of the detector
for a gamma energy of interest, Ms is the sample mass, tc is the total counting time, Pγ is the abundance of the γ-line
in a radionuclide.

3.3 Radiation Hazard Indices

To assess the health status of irradiated persons in an environment, UNSCEAR (2008) and ICRP (2012)
recommended the following hazard indices for radiological risk assessment:

(i) Radium Equivalent Activity (Raeq): Since 98.5% of the radiological hazard of uranium series is due to radium
and its decay products, 238U is replaced with concentration of 226Ra in hazard assessment. As a result of non-
uniform distribution of 226Ra, 232Th and 40K in environmental samples, uniformity with respect to exposure to
radiation has been defined in terms of radium equivalent activity (Ra eq) to compare the activity of materials
containing different amounts of 226Ra, 232Th and 40K. This index makes possible the use of a single regulatory limit
on radionuclide rather than having to limit uranium, thorium and potassium separately (Farai and Ademola, 2005).
This index also provides a useful guideline in regulating the safety standards on radiation protection for the general
public residing in an area. The Raeq index represents a weighted sum of activities of 238U, 232Th and 40K and it is
based on the estimation that 370Bq/kg of 238U, 259Bq/kg of 232Th and 4810Bq/kg of 40K provide the same gamma
radiation dose rates and it is given as:

Raeq = ARa + 1.43ATh + 0.077AK ………………………………………………………….. (2)

Where ARa, ATh and Ak are the activity concentrations of 226Ra, 232Th and 40K respectively measured in Bq/l. The
allowable limit of Raeq in environmental samples is 370 Bq/l (UNSCEAR, 2000, 2008).

(ii) Absorbed Dose Rate (D): It is imperative to calculate the absorbed dose rate based on the fact that radiation
exposure pathways involved inhalation and ingestion of radioactive pollutants. The absorbed dose rates (D) due to
gamma radiation from ingested radionuclide in water was calculated from 238U, 232Th and 40K activity concentration
values assuming that other radionuclides such as 137Cs, 90Sr and 235U decay series are neglected since they contribute
very little to the total dose from environmental background.

D= 0.462Au + 0.604ATh + 0.0417AK …………………………………………………….. (3)

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved
192
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Where: Au, ATh and AK are the activity concentrations of 238U, 232Th and 40K in Bq/kg respectively. The unit of D is
ηGyh-1.

(iii) Annual Gonadal Dose Equivalent (AGDE): The gonads, the bone marrow and the bone surface cells are
considered as organs of interest by UNSCEAR (2000, 2008) and ICRP (2012) because of their sensitivity to
radiation. An increase in AGDE has been known to affect the bone marrow, causing destruction of the red blood
cells that are then replaced by white blood cells. This situation results in a blood cancer called leukemia which is
fatal (Avwiri et. al., 2014). Therefore, the AGDE due to the activities of 238U, 232Th and 40K in the water that is
consumed by inhabitants in a community or by using it for various purposes was evaluated by the following
equation (Avwiri et. al., 2012; UNSCEAR, 2008):

AGDE (mSv/y) = 3.09AU + 4.18ATh + 0.314AK ………………………………………… (4)

Where Au, ATh and AK are respectively the activity concentrations of 238U, 232Th and 40K in Bq/l.

(iv)The External Hazard Index (Hex): Most radionuclides occur naturally in terrestrial soils and rocks and upon
decay, these radionuclides finds its way into surface and underground water bodies thus producing an external
radiation field to which all human beings are exposed to. In terms of dose, the principal primordial radionuclides are
232Th, 238U and 40K. Thorium and uranium head series of radionuclides that produce significant human exposure.

Therefore the external hazard index becomes another parameter of interest. It is defined as (UNSCEAR, 2000;
Beretka and Mathew, 1985):

HEx = ARa + ATh + AK ≤ 1 ……………………………………………….. (5)

370 259 4810

Where Au, ATh and AK are respectively the activity concentrations of 238U, 232Th and 40K in Bq/l. The value of this
index (Hex) must be less than unity for the radiation hazard to be negligible (UNSCEAR, 2008) while H ex equal to
unity corresponds to the upper limit of radium equivalent dose of 370Bq/kg (Beretka and Mathew, 1985).

(v) The Internal Hazard Index: Radon (Rn) is the product of natural decay of radium (Ra), which is nearly in all
rocks and finds its way into water bodies when it weathers and the soils are blown or eroded/carried into surface
waters. The internal exposure to radon is very hazardous to the respiratory organs and can lead to respiratory
diseases like asthma and cancer (Tufail et. al., 2007). Hence it has become imperative to evaluate and quantify the
internal hazard index Hin by the relation (UNSCEAR, 2000; Beretka and Mathew, 1985):

Hin = ARa + ATh + AK ≤ 1 ………………………………………….. (6)

185 259 4810

Again, the value of the internal hazard index (Hin) must be less than unity for the radiation hazard to be negligible
(UNSCEAR, 2000).

(vi)The Representative Gamma Index (Iγr): This is also known as gamma radiation representative level index
(RLI). This index is used to estimate the gamma radiation hazard associated with the natural radionuclide in specific
investigated samples. It is a screening tool for identifying materials that become of health concern when used for
construction and other purposes (Tufail et. al., 2007). The representative gamma index is given by OCED/NEA
(1979):

Iγr = CRa + CTh + CK ……………………………………………………… (7)

150 100 1500

(vii)The Committed Annual Effective Dose (AEDE): The committed annual effective dose to an individual due
to the consumption of radionuclides from water is the arithmetic summation of the effective dose of the three
measured radionuclides and was estimated using the relation (UNSCEAR, 2008):

AEDE = Iw. Aw .Σ C(U, Th, K); OR ……………………………………………………….. (8)

AEDE = Iw [AwU.CU+AwTh.CTh+AwK.CK] …………………………………………………. (9)

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

193
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Where Iw is the daily intake or consumption of water per person. WHO (2012) considers 3 age groups for the
assessment of radiation doses. These are infants aged 1 year old, children aged 10 years old and below, and adults
aged 17 years old and above. The daily intake or consumption of water is taken as 2 litres per day for adults (≥ 17
years), 1 litre per day for children (≤ 10 years) and 0.75 litres per day for infants (ICRP, 2012; IAEA, 2004; WHO,
2011) multiplied by 365 days (e.g 2x365= 730 litres per year for adults). A w is the activity concentration of
radionuclides in water samples (Bq/l); AwU, AwTh and AwK are respectively the activity concentration of 238U, 232Th
and 40K in Bq/l in the water samples, and C (i.e CU, CTh and CK) is the ingestion coefficient or the dose conversion
factors of the specific radionuclide (Bq/l) which were extracted from ICRP (2012) and IAEA (2004).

(viii) Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk (ELCR): This is the probability of developing cancer over a lifetime at a
given exposure level and it is presented as a value representing the number of extra cancers expected in a given
number of people on exposure to a carcinogen at a given dose (Ononugbo et. al, 2013). The Excess lifetime cancer
risk (ELCR) is given as (Taskin et. al., 2009):

ELCR = AEDE x DL x RF ……………………………………………………………….. (10)

Where AEDE is the annual committed effective equivalent dose, DL is average duration of life (estimated to be 70
years for Nigeria) and RF is the risk factor (Sv -1) i.e fatal cancer risk per sievert. For stochastic effects, ICRP (2012)
uses RF as 0.05 for members of the public. In this study, the probability of children (≤ 10 years) and adults (≥ 17
years) in developing cancer over a lifetime at a given exposure rate from 238U, 232Th and 40K was computed.

3.4 Statistical Analysis

Due to the oil bunkering/artisanal oil refining activities, previous occurrence of oil spillages and gaseous emission
of particulate matter from flare stacks at flow stations in the investigated communities, statistical analysis using SPSS
version 20 software was performed on the water samples data of the mean activity concentration among the three
communities. The essence of the statistical analysis was to establish if the different activities associated with oil
mining operations in the area has in any way affected the activity concentration levels of the radionuclides in the
water sample sources. A one way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was employed to ascertain if there is a significant
difference in the mean activity concentrations of radionuclides in the water samples from the various communities
and the control. In using this statistical tool, two hypotheses were propounded, the null (H o) and the alternative
hypothesis (H1) which states as follows:

Ho: There is no significant difference in the mean activity concentration values of

natural radionuclides in the water samples collected from various sources in the
three communities and the control
H1: There is a significant difference in the mean activity concentration values of
natural radionuclides in the water samples collected from various sources in the
three communities and the control

The statistical analysis were performed at 95% confidence interval and the Duncan post hoc test was applied to
determine statistically significant differences among individual means at p<0.05.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1 Statistical Analysis Assessment of Water Radioactivity: The mean activity concentration of water samples
for the hand-dug well water ranged from 11.94±1.12 to 12.77± 1.12Bq/l for 238U; 7.88±1.05 to 9.20±1.82Bq/l for
232Th; and 13.50±0.62 to 20.13±3.88Bq/l for 40K. The mean activity concentration of water samples for the

tap/borehole water ranged from 2.42±0.45Bq/l to 5.31±0.80Bq/l for 238U; 1.02±1.01 to 2.24±0.90Bq/l for 232Th;
and 9.71±5.04 to 11.73±3.77Bq/l for 40K. While the 238U, 232Th and 40K activity concentrations in the river/creek
waters ranged respectively from 6.81±0.80 to 8.82±1.20Bq/l, 4.25±0.65 to 9.52±1.16Bq/l and 25.01±3.23 to
30.03±1.96Bq/l. These values are higher than the mean activity concentrations of the three radionuclides in the
control samples (Table 2). The mean activity of 238U, 232Th and 40K in the hand-dug well water samples at Bunu-Tai
and Bodo, and the mean activity concentration of 232Th and 40K in the tap/borehole water respectively at Bunu-Tai
and Bodo communities were above the WHO (2011) recommended standards of 10Bq/l for 238U, 1.0Bq/l for 232Th
and 10Bq/l for 40K. Again, the mean activity values of 232Th and 40K in the river/creek water samples at Eleme,

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

194
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Bunu-Tai and Bodo communities were higher than the international standard. The implication is that the hand-dug
well water, tap/borehole water and water from river/creek in those communities are radiologically not fit and safe
for consumption because they are contaminated by natural radionuclides from anthropogenic sources. These results
are higher than those obtained by Avwiri et. al (2014) on the level of natural radioactivity in river bank and the river
water along Mini-Okoro/Oginigba creek in PortHarcourt. It is also higher than the works of Maxwel et. al (2015)
on the radioactivity levels of groundwater at Dei-Dei and Kubwa areas of Abuja, North central Nigeria.
Nevertheless, the radioactivity result of this study is lower than the works of Ononugbo et al. (2013) on the
assessment of surface and groundwater around oilfields and host communities at Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni LGA of
Rivers State. It is also lower than the values from the works of Chad-Umoren and Nwali (2013).

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed to determine if the activity concentration of radionuclides in water
samples has been elevated in the three communities as compared to the control sample, hence the data in table 2
were subjected to statistical testing. The result of the one way ANOVA test at 95% confidence interval revealed that
there was a statistically significant difference in the mean activity concentration of natural radionuclides in the water
samples from various water supply sources in the three communities compared to the control (Table 3). The null
hypothesis was therefore rejected. This is an indication that the community water supply sources have been
enriched with the three radionuclides. Multiple comparison tests identified the communities whose water supply
source contributed to this significant difference and the result showed that: (1) 238U radionuclide contents in the
water samples at the control well, Bunu-Tai borehole, Bodo borehole, Eleme river, Bodo well and Bunu-Tai well are
statistically significantly different from each other at p<0.05 in the following order: Control well<Bunu-Tai
borehole<Bodo borehole<Eleme river<Bodo well< Bunu-Tai well; (2) 232Th radionuclide contents in the water
samples at the control well, Eleme borehole, Bunu-Tai river, Bodo river and Bodo well are statistically significantly
different from each other at p<0.05 in the following order: Control well<Eleme borehole<Bunu-Tai river<Bodo
river<Bodo well; and (3) 40K radionuclide contents in the water samples at the control well, Bunu-Tai borehole,
Bodo borehole, Eleme borehole, Bodo well, Bunu-Tai well, Eleme river, Bunu-Tai river and Bodo river are
statistically significantly different from each other at p<0.05 in the following order: Control well<Bunu-Tai
borehole<Bodo borehole<Eleme borehole<Bodo well<Bunu-Tai well<Eleme river<Bunu-Tai river<Bodo river.

Table 2: Mean Activity of Radionuclides in the community Water Samples with Control

S/N Sample Name Specific Activity Concentration (Bq/l)

o 238U 232Th 40K

1 Eleme Well Water - - -

2 Bunu-Tai Well Water 12.77±1.12 9.20±1.82 20.13±3.88
3 Bodo Well 11.94±1.12 7.88±1.05 13.50±0.62
4 Alode (Eleme) Tap/borehole 2.42±0.45 2.24±0.90 11.73±3.77

5 Bunu-Tai Tap/borehole 3.82±2.20 1.02±1.01 9.71±5.04

6 Bodo Tap/borehole 5.31±0.80 1.20±0.51 11.21±2.10
7 Ochanai Creek (Eleme) 6.81±0.80 9.52±1.16 25.01±3.23
8 Oo-a-naana River (Bunu-Tai) 8.48±1.84 4.25±0.65 27.83±1.30

9 Sugi-Bodo River (Bodo) 8.82±1.20 5.31±0.91 30.03±1.96

CONTROL WATER SAMPLES
1 Hand-dug Well 1.32±0.14 0.90±0.01 5.30±0.07
2 Tap/borehole 2.26±0.08 0.43±0.08 5.58±0.03
3 River/Creek 2.94±0.10 0.53±0.01 6.23±0.06
WHO ( 2011) 10.0 1.0 10.0

Table 3: ANOVA for 238U, 232Th and 40K in the Water Samples

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Uranium-238 Between Groups 477.273 10 47.727 434.615 .000

Within Groups 2.416 22 .110

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

195
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Total 479.689 32

Thorium-232 Between Groups 258.564 10 25.856 130.786 .000

Within Groups 4.349 22 .198
Total 262.913 32
Potassium-40 Between Groups 3517.058 10 351.706 8959.619 .000
Within Groups .864 22 .039
Total 3517.921 32

4.2 Radiological Hazard Assessment of Water Samples: The mean values of radium equivalent activity,
absorbed dose rates, annual gonadal equivalent dose, internal and external hazard indices, and gamma representative
index due to the presence of 238U, 232Th and 40K in the water samples are all respectively within the permissible
standards (Table 4). These mean values of absorbed dose rate of water samples from the three supply sources are
lower than the 28.79±11.10ηGy/h obtained by Chad-Umoren and Nwali (2013) at Okrika creek due to discharge of
wastes from the PortHarcourt refinery. The result of the absorbed dose rate for river/creek water in this study is 6.6
times higher than the value obtained for the water around Mini-Okoro/Oginigba creek in PortHarcourt by Avwiri
et. al. (2014). The fact that the values of the absorbed dose rate is higher in the hand-dug well water than the
river/creek and tap/borehole waters implies that those drinking or using the water from the hand-dug well are more
exposed to radiation of the three natural radionuclides present in the water. The contribution of 238U, 232Th and 40K
to the absorbed dose in the hand-dug well water samples are 49%, 45% and 6% respectively with 238U contributing
the highest to the absorbed dose rates (Figure 3) while the contribution of 238U, 232Th and 40K to the absorbed dose
in the tap/borehole water samples are 56%, 29% and15% respectively with 238U contributing the highest to the
absorbed dose rates (Figure 4). The contribution of 238U, 232Th and 40K to the absorbed dose for the river/creek
water samples are 44%, 43% and 13% respectively with 238U also contributing the highest to the absorbed dose
rates (Figure 5). The percentage of total absorbed dose of 238U, 232Th and 40K in water when ingested from the three
water supply sources in the study area are respectively 50%, 38% and 12% (Figure 6).

The AGED values for the river/creek water in this study is higher than the 10.18mSv/y reported for the water
around Mini-Okoro/Oginigba creek in PortHarcourt obtained by Avwiri et. al. (2014). The values of committed
annual effective dose due to intake of water by the children and adults from hand-dug well waters, tap/borehole
waters and rivers/creek waters are well above the 0.29mSv/y recommended international permissible standard by
UNSCEAR (2008) as shown in figure 7. It therefore means that children and adults are very much susceptible to
high dose related diseases through intake of water from these water supply sources in the study area. The result of
this study also compares with the values obtained by Ononugbo et. al. (2013) on the evaluation of natural
radionuclide content in surface and groundwater and excess lifetime cancer risk due to gamma radioactivity for the
Ogba, Egema and Ndoni oilfields and host communities in Rivers State where they recorded high mean values of
committed annual effective dose above permissible standards for the children, teenagers, babies and adults due to
intake of tapwater, well water and river water. The excess lifetime cancer risks (ELCR) values due to intake of water
by the children and adults from hand-dug well waters, tap/borehole waters and rivers/creek waters are well above
the 0.0001mSv/y (1x10-4mSv/y) worldwide permissible limit by USEPA (2012) (Figure 8). This means that the
chances of having cancer by the children and adults in the study area as well as the people living around the area
who depend on these water sources are very high. Therefore all the sources of drinking water in this area must be
treated before consumption so as to avert the likely health implications. This result compares well with the works of
Ononugbo et. al (2013) who recorded high mean values of ELCR that are above the USEPA world average
permissible limit obtained for children, teenagers, babies and adults due to intake of tap water, well water and river
waters at the Ogba, Egbema and Ndoni oilfield host communities in Rivers State. The ELCR values obtained in this
study is also higher than the 5x10-6mSv/y obtained by Avwiri et. al. (2014) in the water around Mini-
Okoro/Oginigba creek at PortHarcourt, Rivers State.

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

196
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Figure 3: Percentage Absorbed Dose of the three Radionuclides in Hand-dug well waters

Figure 4: Percentage Absorbed Dose of the three Radionuclides in Tap/borehole waters

Figure 5: Percentage Absorbed Dose of the three Radionuclides in River/Creek waters

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

197
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Figure 6: Percentage Absorbed Dose of the 238U, 232Th and 40K in water from the three water supply sources in the
study area

Table 4: Activity Concentration of Natural Radionuclides (238U, 232Th and 40K) in the Water Samples and
the associated Radiation Hazard Indices

S/ Sample Specific Activity (Bq/l) D Ra(e AG Hin He Iγ Committed ELCR

No Name (ηGy q) ED x Annual (mSv/y)
/h) (Bq (mS Effective
/l) v/y) Dose
(mSv/y)
238U 232Th 40K Chil Adu Chil Ad
dren lt dren ult
≤10y ≥17 ≤10y ≥1
ears yrs ears 7yr
s
1 Bunu-Tai 12.77± 9.20± 20.13± 12.29 27. 84.2 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.39 2.06 0.00 0.0
Well 1.12 1.82 3.88 48 4 09 74 91 48 07
Water 2
2 Bodo 11.94± 7.88± 13.50± 10.84 24. 74.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.19 1.78 0.00 0.0
Well 1.12 1.05 0.62 25 7 98 66 67 42 06
Water 2
3 Alode 2.42±0 2.24± 11.73± 2.96 6.5 20.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.35 0.51 0.00 0.0
(Eleme) .45 0.90 3.77 3 2 24 18 46 12 01
Tap/bor 8
ehole
4 Bunu-Tai 3.82±2 1.02± 9.71±5 2.79 6.0 19.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.25 0.34 0.00 0.0
Tap/bor .20 1.00 .04 3 2 27 16 42 08 01
ehole 2
5 Bodo 5.31±0 1.20± 11.21± 3.65 7.8 24.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.31 0.43 0.00 0.0
Tap/bor .80 0.51 2.10 9 4 36 21 55 11 01
ehole 5
6 Ochanai 6.81±0 9.52± 25.01± 9.94 22. 68.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.29 1.94 0.00 0.0
Creek .80 1.16 3.23 35 9 79 60 57 45 06
(Eleme) 8
7 Oo-a- 8.48±1 4.25± 27.83± 7.65 16. 52.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.79 1.12 0.00 0.0
naana .84 0.65 1.30 70 1 68 45 18 28 03
River 9
(Bunu-
www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved
198
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Tai)

8 Sugi- 8.82±1 5.31± 30.03± 8.53 18. 58.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.92 1.32 0.00 0.0
Bodo .20 0.91 1.96 73 8 74 51 32 32 04
River 6
(Bodo)
WHO (2011); 10.0 1.0 10.0 59 ≤ 300 ≤ ≤ ≤1 0.29 0.29 0.00 0.0
UNSCEAR 370 1 1 01 00
(2008); OECD 1
(1979), IAEA
(2007);
USEPA (2012)

2.5
Committed Annual Effective Dose

2
1.5
1
(mSv/y)

0.5
0 ≤10 Years (Children)
UNSCEAR Standard
≥17 Years (Adults)

Figure 7: Committed Annual Effective Dose for children and adults due to intake of water from the three sources
of water supply

0.008
Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk

0.007
0.006
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0 ≤10 Years (Children)
UNSCEAR (2008) Standard
≥17 Years (Adults)

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

199
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

Figure 8: Excess Lifetime Cancer Risks for children and adults due to intake of water from the three sources of
water supply

5. Conclusion

The activity concentration of natural radionuclides in the water samples from three water supply sources in an
environment with history of crude oil spillages, illegal artisanal oil refining/bunkering activities and gas flaring have
been measured with gamma ray spectroscopy. Results showed that the mean activity concentration of 238U, 232Th
and 40K in the hand-dug well water samples at Bunu-Tai and Bodo communities as well as the mean activity
concentration of 232Th and 40K in the tap/borehole water respectively at Bunu-Tai and Bodo communities were
above the recommended standards of 10Bq/l for 238U, 1.0Bq/l for 232Th and 10Bq/l for 40K. The study also
revealed that the mean activity values of 232Th and 40K in the river/creek water samples at Eleme, Bunu-Tai and
Bodo communities were higher than the international standard. ANOVA statistical testing showed that there was
statistically significant difference at p<0.05 in the mean variations of the activity concentrations of natural
radionuclides in the water supply sources within the three communities considered and the control thus confirming
radionuclide enrichment in the water samples collected from the three water supply sources. The study also revealed
that children and adults in the three communities are susceptible to high dose related diseases and have high
chances of contracting cancer due to the consumption of water from the three water supply sources because the
values of committed annual effective dose and excess lifetime cancer risk are respectively higher than the
international permissible limits of 0.29mSv/y and 1x10 -4 mSv/y. community based awareness programme by
relevant authorities on the issue of environmental contamination is advised. It is recommended that inhabitants of
the communities should discontinue the use and consumption of water from these water supply sources and a large
reservoir be constructed where clean potable water would be supplied daily from unpolluted environment. The
relevant environmental agencies and other stakeholders should also ensure that anthropogenic discharges into
surface and groundwater be reduced and all defaulting industries sanctioned for violating industrial effluent
standards.

REFERENCES

1. Ajayi, J. O., Adedokun, O. and Balogun, B. B. (2012). Levels of radionuclide content in stream water of
some selected rivers in Ogbomosho land, South west Nigeria. Journal of Environmental and Earth
Sciences, 4(a): 835-837.
2. Alikor, V. (2022). The disturbing impact of soot on public health and economy of PortHarcourt. Business
Day Newspaper. Retrieved online from www.businessday.ng. (Accessed: 7th October, 2022).
3. Amajor, L. C. (1991). Aquifers in Benin Formation (Miocene-Recent), Eastern Niger Delta:
Lithostratigraphy, Hydraulics and Water Quality. Environmental Geology and Water Science, (17)2: 85-101.
4. Aregunjo, A. M., Farai, I. P. and Fuwape, I. A. (2005). Impact of oil and gas industry to the natural
radioactivity distribution in the delta region of Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Physics, 16: 131-136.
5. Avwiri, G. O., Osimobi, J. C. and Agbalagba, E. O. (2012). Evaluation of Radiation Hazard indices and
Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk Due to Natural Radioactivity in Soil profile of Udi and Ezeagu Local
Government Areas of Enugu State, Nigeria. Comprehensive Journal of Environmental and Earth Sciences,
1(1): 1-10
6. Avwiri, G. O., Ononugbo, C. P. and Nwokeoji, I. E. (2014). Radiation Hazard indices and Excess Lifetime
Cancer Risk in Soil, Sediment and water around Mini-Okoro/Oginigba Creek, Port-Harcourt, Rivers State,
Nigeria. Comprehensive Journal of Environment and Earth Sciences, 3(1): 38-50.
7. Azpecza, O. S. and Szabo, Z. (1988). Radioactivity in Groundwater-A Review. United States
Geological Survey Water Supply Paper, 2325: 50-57.
8. Beretka, J. and Mathew, P. J. (1985). Natural Radioactivity of Australian Building materials,
industrial wastes and by-products. Health Physics, 48: 87-95.
9. Chad-Umoren, Y. E. and Nwali, A. C. (2013). Assessment of Specific Activity Concentration and
Percentage concentration of 226Ra, 232Th and 40K to absorbed dose rate of the Port-Harcourt Refinery
Company Host Community. Scientia Africana, 12(1): 7-19.
10. Farai, I. P. and Ademola, J. A. (2005). Radium Equivalent Activity Concentration in concrete
Building blocks in eight cities in South Western Nigeria. Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 79: 119-
125

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

200
 International Journal of Applied Science and Research

11. Fasunwon, O., Olowofela, J., Akinyemi, O. and Akintokun, O. (2008). Contaminants Evaluation in Water
Quality Indicators in Ago-Iwoye, Southwestern Nigeria. African Physical Review, 2: 110-116
12. International Atomic Energy Agency-Technical Documentation (IAEA-TECDOC 1472). (2004).
Proceedings of an international conference on naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM IV).
Szczyrk, Poland.
13. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2007). Dosimetry in Diagnostic Radiology: An International
Code of Practice. Technical Report Series No. 457.
14. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). (2012). Compendium of dose
coefficients based on ICRP Publication 60. ICRP Publication 119. Annals of ICRP 41 (Supplementary).
15. Jibiri, N. N., Amakom, C. M. and Adewuyi, G. O. (2010). Radionuclide Contents and
Physicochemical Water Quality Indicators in Stream, Well and Borehole Water Sources in High Radiation
Area of Abeokuta, Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Water Resources and Protection, 2: 291-297.
16. Jibiri, N. O., Alausa, S. K., Owofolaju, A. E. and Adeniran, A. (2011). A terrestrial gamma dose rates and
physical-chemical properties of farm soils from ex-tin mining locations in Jos-Plateau, Nigeria. African
Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 5(12): 1039-1049.
17. Maxwell, O., Wagiran, H., Lee, S. K., Embong, Z. and Ugwuoke, P. E. (2015). Radioactivity level and toxic
elemental concentration in groundwater at Dei-Dei and Kubwa areas of Abuja, North-Central Nigeria.
Journal of Radiation Physics and Chemistry, 107: 23-30.
18. Naku, D. (2022). Illegal refining: PortHarcourt residents choked, remain in endless battle with soot. Punch
Newspaper. Retrieved online from www.punchng.com. (Accessed: 7th October, 2022).
19. Nigerian Geological Survey Agency (NGSA) (2010). Geologic and Hydrological map of Ogoniland, Port-
Harcourt, Rivers State.
20. Ononugbo, P. C., Avwiri, G. O. and Egieya, J. M. (2013). Evaluation of natural radionuclide content in
surface and groundwater and excess lifetime cancer risk due to gamma radioactivity. Academic Research
International, 4(6): 636-647.
21. Ononugbo, P. C. and Ogan, A. C. (2017). Determinatio of Radiological Health Risk Due to Gamma
Exposure from River Water around oil Bunkering Centres in Rivers State, Nigeria. Advances in Research,
9(6): 1-12.
22. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development/Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD/NEA).
(1979). Exposure to radiation from natural radioactivity in building Materials. Report by NEA Group of
Experts, Nuclear Energy Agency (Paris: OECD).
23. Short, K. C. and Stauble, A. J. (1967). Outline of the Geology of the Niger Delta. American
Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 51: 761 -779.
24. Tattam, C. M. (1943). A Review of Nigerian Stratigraphy. Geological Survey of Nigeria
Report, Lagos. Pp. 27-46.
25. Taskin, H. M., Karavus, P., Ay, A., Touzogh, S., Hindiroglu and Karaham, G. (2009).
Radionuclide Concentration in Soil and lifetime cancer risk due to the gamma radioactivity in Kirklareli.
Turkey. Journal of environmental radioactivity, 100: 49-53.
26. Tufail, M., Akkhtar, N., Jaried, S. and Hamid, T. (2007). Natural radioactivity Hazards of
building bricks fabrication from soil of two districts of Pakistan. Journal of Radiological Protection, 27:
481-492
27. United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2000).
Exposures from Natural Sources, 2000 report to General Assembly, Annex B, New York.
28. United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2008).
Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation, UNSCEAR 2008 Report to the General Assembly with
Scientific Annexes Vol. I, United Nations, New York, 2010
29. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2006). Water Aid Nigeria:
Groundwater and Drinking Water, Water Quality Policy. EPA Report, No. 810/k-92-001.
30. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2012). 2012 Edition of Drinking
Water Standards and Health Advisors. EPA 822-S-12-001. Washington DC
31. World Health Organization (WHO) (2011). Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, (4th Ed).
World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
32. World Health Organization (WHO) (2012). Preliminary dose estimation from the nuclear
accident after the 2011 Great East Japan earthquake and Tsunami. World Health Organization, Geneva,
Switzerland.

www.ijasr.org Copyright © 2022 IJASR All rights reserved

201