ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Assessment of Water Regime, Management
and Quality Analysis Based on Water Quality
Indices – A Case of Karaganda Region,
Kazakhstan
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Management and Engineering in the Field of Environmental Protection,
Astana City, Satpayev 2, 010008 Republic of Kazakhstan
2
Department of Chemistry, chemical technology and ecology, Kazakh University of Technology and Business,
Astana City, Yesil district, Kayym Mukhamedkhanov str., building 37 A, Republic of Kazakhstan
3
Department of Ecology, Kh. Dosmukhamedov Atyrau University, Atyrau 060001, Republic of Kazakhstan,
Atyrau City, Studenchesky Ave., 1 Atyrau 060001, Republic of Kazakhstan
4
Department of Environmental Engineering and Management, The University of Dodoma,
P. O. Box 259, Dodoma, Tanzania
Submission date: 2023-07-22
Final revision date: 2023-07-27
Acceptance date: 2023-08-26
Online publication date: 2023-11-16
Publication date: 2024-01-03
Corresponding author
Yerbol Pangaliyev
Department of Management and Engineering in the Field of Environmental Protection,
Astana City, Satpayev 2, 010008 Republic of Kazakhstan
Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2024;33(1):781-801
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The research aims to analyze the complex water balance, surface water quality, and water resources
management in the Karaganda region. A thorough investigation involved examining 119 lakes and 12
rivers within the region. The study revealed that the annual river flow into the Karaganda lakes and their
subsequent outflow from the territory was notably meager, accounting for only 0.935% and 3.031%,
respectively, primarily due to the scarcity of water bodies in the region. As for water quality, none of the
lakes qualify as “highly suitable water” (>50), necessitating further treatment to make them drinkable.
Only a small fraction, 4.6% of the lakes, display water quality scores ranging from 50 to 100, indicating
the urgent need for substantial remediation efforts. Additionally, a considerable proportion, 47.7% of
the lakes, fell within the water quality range of 100-200, demanding treatment before appropriate use.
Furthermore, a noteworthy 11% of the lakes were deemed “unsuitable for drinking” (>300), while 36.7%
are classified as “very poor water” in the range of 200-300. In the context of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), the aspects of stakeholder participation, ecosystem protection, and water quality
management received the least favorable evaluations, with an average score ranging from 2.4 to 2.8.