I just realised that i didn't actually put up my whole intro yet so here it is( from the beginning)
Soil pollution is when the pollutants in soil are above a certain level causing the soil to lose one or more of its functions (EUROPA, 16/6/2010). Soil pollution may also be thought of as the presence of manmade chemicals or any other modifications in the natural environment (EUROPA, 16/6/2010). The most common chemicals causing soil pollution are: petroleum hydrocarbons, pesticides, lead used in cars and house paint and other heavy metals (EUROPA, 16/6/2010) (SAFER SOLUTIONS, N.D). The occurrence of this manifestation is linked with industrialisation and the intensity of chemical usage (EUROPA, 16/6/2010). Soil pollution is widespread in all areas and is often the outcome of years of planned or unintentional emission of pollutants (SAFER SOLUTIONS, N.D).
The aim of the experiment is to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment. The two main components that control the storage and the movement of liquids in rocks and sediments are porosity and permeability (enotes, N.D). Porosity is the ratio of the volume of pores or openings to the total volume of the rock sediment (enotes, N.D). It is usually expressed as a percentage. Basically, the porosity of a rock is the spaces in between the grains (enotes, N.D). Therefore, if the grains are tightly packed, it sediment has a lower porosity (enotes, N.D). Permeability is how easily liquids flow through a porous sediment. Even if sediment has a high porosity, if the voids are not interconnecting properly, the liquid may not move through (enotes, N.D). Like in porosity, how tightly packed the grains are and the shape of the grains determine how permeable a certain sediment is (enotes, N.D).
The experiment will help determine whether the hypothesis, a soil type with more porosity will have more space for the pollutant to fill and therefore it will absorb more of the pollutant, is true or not.
The experiment involves: white sand, potting mix and common soil from the garden. The soil from the garden consisted of dead roots, leaves, small branches and rocks. Whereas the potting mix consisted of Wettasoil granular soil wetter, base fertiliser and BioActive compost coir dust. Coir dust is a spongy like residue from the husks of coconut. Coir dust is also hydrophilic which means it attracts water and strongly absorbs liquids and gasses Cresswell, Geof. N.D. p.2). This should therefore make the potting mix the most absorbent. Sand is made of sandstone and the porosity of sandstone is 5-30% (SEED, N.D). The porosity of typical soil is 55% and the porosity of the potting mix is unknown (SEED, N.D).
...this is the actual thing... if you didn't realise..
bye
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
conclusion
The aim of the experiment was to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment using the mediums: white sand, potting mix and soil from a garden. The pollutants involved in the experiment were, vegetable oil, petrol and engine coolant. The potting mix, which has the greatest porosity, absorbed the most amount of the pollutant and the hypothesis was therefore supported.
like EVERYTHINGELSE i've done.. simple and sweet!
ABSTRACT:
Soil pollution is widespread in all areas and is often the outcome of years of planned or unintentional emission of pollutants (SAFER SOLUTIONS, N.D). The aim of the experiment was to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment using the mediums: white sand, potting mix and soil from a garden. The pollutants involved in the experiment were, vegetable oil, petrol and engine coolant. The hypothesis is that a soil type with more porosity will have absorbed more of the pollutants. The potting mix, which has the greatest porosity, absorbed the most amount of the pollutant and the hypothesis was therefore supported.
like EVERYTHINGELSE i've done.. simple and sweet!
ABSTRACT:
Soil pollution is widespread in all areas and is often the outcome of years of planned or unintentional emission of pollutants (SAFER SOLUTIONS, N.D). The aim of the experiment was to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment using the mediums: white sand, potting mix and soil from a garden. The pollutants involved in the experiment were, vegetable oil, petrol and engine coolant. The hypothesis is that a soil type with more porosity will have absorbed more of the pollutants. The potting mix, which has the greatest porosity, absorbed the most amount of the pollutant and the hypothesis was therefore supported.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Discussion
So after a lot of though i have finished my discussion... howeever, it's not too long. hopefully the quality-quantity thing works for me here...
The hypothesis was that a soil type with more porosity will have more space for the pollutant to fill and therefore it will absorb more of the pollutant. Sand has a porosity of 5-30%, sandstone (made up of sand) has a porosity of 55% and the porosity of potting mix is unknown. However, since the potting mix had coir dust in it, it can be assumed that it has a higher porosity than the typical soil found in a garden. If this is assumed, then the results from the experiment support the hypothesis and the experiment was successful as the aim of the experiment, to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment, was fulfilled.
From the experiment, it was found that the potting mix absorbed the most amount of liquid in total, followed by the soil from the garden. The white sand absorbed the least. However, when it came to the experiments involving petrol, potting mix absorbed the least amount of the pollutant. It absorbed 26millilitres less than the white sand and 6 millilitres less than the soil from the garden. The reason for this is due to the pollutants’ viscosity. Viscosity is a liquid’s resistance to flow. A liquid that has a high viscosity will resist flowing more than a liquid that has a low viscosity. Oil has the highest viscosity out of the three pollutants followed by the diluted engine coolant. It was observed that the oil and engine coolant sat on top of the soils for a while when they had been poured on. This now can be concluded that this was because they both had higher viscosities. Petrol has a low viscosity; it has a lower viscosity than water. Potting mix is very porous and has very large void spaces, whereas the void spaces of the white sand and the soil from the garden are smaller and more compacted. This meant that the petrol passed through the potting mix much faster than it did for the white sand and the soil from the garden. After the 60 seconds had passed, the petrol may have only gotten half way through the white sand when it would have come through in the potting mix. Since the method used does not take into account the porosity of the pollutants, the method is not entirely reliable. However, the hypothesis can still be supported by the experiment as it still proves that a soil type with more porosity will absorb more of the pollutant.
well I think it's ok...i guess...
The hypothesis was that a soil type with more porosity will have more space for the pollutant to fill and therefore it will absorb more of the pollutant. Sand has a porosity of 5-30%, sandstone (made up of sand) has a porosity of 55% and the porosity of potting mix is unknown. However, since the potting mix had coir dust in it, it can be assumed that it has a higher porosity than the typical soil found in a garden. If this is assumed, then the results from the experiment support the hypothesis and the experiment was successful as the aim of the experiment, to investigate which soil absorbs the greatest amount of pollutants in the environment, was fulfilled.
From the experiment, it was found that the potting mix absorbed the most amount of liquid in total, followed by the soil from the garden. The white sand absorbed the least. However, when it came to the experiments involving petrol, potting mix absorbed the least amount of the pollutant. It absorbed 26millilitres less than the white sand and 6 millilitres less than the soil from the garden. The reason for this is due to the pollutants’ viscosity. Viscosity is a liquid’s resistance to flow. A liquid that has a high viscosity will resist flowing more than a liquid that has a low viscosity. Oil has the highest viscosity out of the three pollutants followed by the diluted engine coolant. It was observed that the oil and engine coolant sat on top of the soils for a while when they had been poured on. This now can be concluded that this was because they both had higher viscosities. Petrol has a low viscosity; it has a lower viscosity than water. Potting mix is very porous and has very large void spaces, whereas the void spaces of the white sand and the soil from the garden are smaller and more compacted. This meant that the petrol passed through the potting mix much faster than it did for the white sand and the soil from the garden. After the 60 seconds had passed, the petrol may have only gotten half way through the white sand when it would have come through in the potting mix. Since the method used does not take into account the porosity of the pollutants, the method is not entirely reliable. However, the hypothesis can still be supported by the experiment as it still proves that a soil type with more porosity will absorb more of the pollutant.
well I think it's ok...i guess...
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Results
An observation made during the experiment was that when the vegetable oil and engine coolant were poured on each of the soil types, the vegetable oil would not pass through straight away. The vegetable oil and engine coolant would sit on the soils and then after about 15 seconds it would pass through.
yay!
I have FINALLY finished my experiment and am ready and bothered to put the pictures up so here they are:
pretty cool huh?
so now that i've done everything, i shall put up my method in "prose and passive past tense".
Method:
A table (as shown below in table 1) was drawn up so that the results could be recorded on. A metal drainer was placed on a dish and 250 grams of sand was measured and placed in the drainer. 250 millilitres of oil was then measured out and poured onto the sand. The oil was left to filter for 60 seconds and the amount of oil that resided in the dish was then subtracted from 250 millilitres to find out how much oil was actually absorbed by the sand. The experiment was then repeated the next day with oil and potting mix and oil and healthy soil from the garden. The day after that, the experiment was repeated except with petrol instead of oil and the day after that, it was repeated with engine coolant instead of oil. A week of analysis was then left in between and the entire experiment was repeated again for reliable results.
BTW: Table 1 is non- existent at the moment...
pretty cool huh?so now that i've done everything, i shall put up my method in "prose and passive past tense".
Method:
A table (as shown below in table 1) was drawn up so that the results could be recorded on. A metal drainer was placed on a dish and 250 grams of sand was measured and placed in the drainer. 250 millilitres of oil was then measured out and poured onto the sand. The oil was left to filter for 60 seconds and the amount of oil that resided in the dish was then subtracted from 250 millilitres to find out how much oil was actually absorbed by the sand. The experiment was then repeated the next day with oil and potting mix and oil and healthy soil from the garden. The day after that, the experiment was repeated except with petrol instead of oil and the day after that, it was repeated with engine coolant instead of oil. A week of analysis was then left in between and the entire experiment was repeated again for reliable results.
BTW: Table 1 is non- existent at the moment...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)