1. Arsenic Contamination and Mitigation in Cambodia Dr. Mickey Sampson Resource Development International- Cambodia

2. Wells tested in Kandal

5. Estimated Population Impacted Using 2004 Census data for usage rates Approximately 102,600 are exposed to arsenic in their drinking water Sources of Error People did not report accuratly their source in the census Education has impacted sources Better sources now available

6. Arsenicosis

7. Mitigation Approaches

8. Education is Vital

9. Infotainment Karaoke

10. Methods of Mitigation Alternate Water Supply/Sources –Surface Water –Rainwater –Hand Dug Wells (Rope Pumps) Removal Technologies –Iron Oxide Co-precipitation –Alumina Hydroxides –Highly technical Media/membranes

11. Surface Water Concerns: Very prone to pathogen contamination Only available in some areas/season Water must be treated for Pathogens before use Boiling (problem storage) Ceramic Filter (Availability and proper use) Chemical Treatment (taste, cost, amebas)

12. Rainwater Harvesting Weather Dependent High cost of storage containers Storage Capacity Safe Storage Best Option is when coupled with a well used for sanitation

13. Rainwater Harvesting 40,000 liters

14. Hand Dug Wells Initial Studies show water is significantly better chemically Is available in most high risk areas Water is more prone to Pathogenic contamination Protecting the source may help

17. Rope Pump

18. Removal Technologies Nails Sand Layer Gravel Layers Modified BioSand Filter or Kachan

20. Three different wells were part of the study. We found removal rates varied significantly as did the chemical content in each. Average overall removal was 39.5%, 47.8% and 75.2%

21. Arsenic Removal vs. Phosphorus

22. Removal Technologies Only used as a last resort Technologies need further testing and evaluation Systems need to be low maintenance and inexpensive

23. Piped Water

24. Thank you www.rdic.org