Abbas I 2011

This article was downloaded by: [Imperial College London Library]
On: 25 June 2014, At: 07:36

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Critical Reviews in Environmental

Science and Technology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/best20
Sources of Pollution in Rooftop

Rainwater Harvesting Systems and Their
Control
a a
T. Abbasi & S. A. Abbasi
a
Center for Pollution Control and Environmental Engineering,
Pondicherry University , Chinnakalapet, Puducherry, 605 014, India
Accepted author version posted online: 04 Jul 2011.Published
online: 10 Oct 2011.
To cite this article: T. Abbasi & S. A. Abbasi (2011) Sources of Pollution in Rooftop Rainwater
Harvesting Systems and Their Control, Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology,
41:23, 2097-2167, DOI: 10.1080/10643389.2010.497438
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2010.497438
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 41:20972167, 2011
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1064-3389 print / 1547-6537 online
DOI: 10.1080/10643389.2010.497438
Sources of Pollution in Rooftop Rainwater

Harvesting Systems and Their Control
T. ABBASI and S. A. ABBASI

Center for Pollution Control and Environmental Engineering, Pondicherry University,
Chinnakalapet, Puducherry 605 014, India
Downloaded by [Imperial College London Library] at 07:36 25 June 2014
Contrary to the popular perception that rainwater harvested from

rooftops is nearly as clean as pure water, a number of contaminants
can be present in such a waterthis is borne out by numerous
studies reviewed by the authors. Once this fact is acknowledged,
it is possible to control the water quality and to bring it within
acceptable levels with simple and inexpensive devices. The authors
address these issues. Besides reviewing the status of the quality of
harvested rainwater, they trace the pathways by which pollutants
can enter in a rainwater harvest. In this backdrop the authors
discuss the strategies to manage the water quality at preharvest as
well as postharvest stages.
KEYWORDS: microbiological contamination, pollutants, rainwa-

ter harvesting, rooftop harvest, treatment, water quality
INTRODUCTION
In a very early stage of its march toward civilization, mankind had learned
to appreciate and utilize rainfall as the most direct source of water. In the
regions of the world that were lean in surface water and ground water
resources, especially, mankind had developed ingenious ways to capture
and store rainwater.
The technique of rooftop harvesting (RTH), which involves harvesting
the water falling over the roof of a dwelling, has also been as age-old as all
other techniques of rainwater harvesting (RWH). In fact, evidence of rooftops
Address correspondence to S. A. Abbasi, Center for Pollution Control and Environmen-

tal Engineering, Pondicherry University, Chinnakalapet, Puducherry 605 014, India. E-mail:
prof.s.a.abbasi@gmail.com
2097
2098 T. Abbasi and S. A. Abbasi
having been designed to collect and divert rainwater toward agricultural

plots or storage tanks are found throughout history (Agarwall and Narain,
1997; Reshmi, 2006; Sanjay Gandhi, 2008). Collecting water from rooftops
and impervious surfaces was a common practice employed by Egyptians,
Palestinians, Iranians, Iraqis, Yemenis, Greeks, and Romans since as far back
as 4000 BC. The collected water was stored in underground tanks and cisterns
with masonry domes (Smet and Moriarty, 2001).
But, as the world approached the modern era, especially after the indus-
trial revolution, it drifted more and more toward large, centralized dam-based
water storage and distribution systems, and bore well-based groundwater
extraction. RWH was increasingly neglected, so was RTH, until the world
almost forgot that these techniques existed.
Now, in the postmodern world, the growing shortage of water, more so

water of utilizable quality, has led to the reemergence of RWH as a powerful
means of water resources development and management. With it RTH has
also staged a global comeback. Already, cities such as Singapore have their
entire rooftops positioned to harvest rainfall (Singh, 2005). In India, also,
major metros such as Chennai are moving toward a 100% coverage of the
roof area of their buildings for rainwater collection. Everywhere else, too,
more and more buildings are being brought under the RTH regime (Reshmi,
2006). However, it must be said that the quantity of rainfall harvestable from
rooftops per capita is directly controlled by the availability of rooftop area
per capita. This figure gets smaller and smaller moving from villages to towns
to cities. The figure is also inversely proportional to the economic status of
the dwellers; wealthier people have larger roof space per capita than do
poorer people. It follows that the potential of rooftop rainwater harvests to
augment the peoples water needs is limited, more so in cities.
The Issue of RTH Water Quality

The water that rains down from the clouds is at its purest before it meets the
air below and then the intercepting surface on the earth. Once out of the
clouds, the quality of water is strongly influenced by the substances it en-
counters and picks upeither as particulates, colloids, or soluteson its
subsequent journey. Water, being one of the most powerful of all solvents,
takes with it portions of nearly every substance that it comes in contact with.
Longer the path water takes before it is collected for use, the greater is
the number and the concentration of the substances that are carried by it. Due
to this reason, the quality of the rooftop harvest can be more easily controlled
than the water falling on larger catchments. Moreover, this control can be
managed at the household level. If not collected at the household level, the
rainwater falls on the ground and keeps flowing through depressions in the
land, sidewalks, and stormwater drains, picking up pollutants of all kinds
along the way. Such nonpoint pollution of rainwater can be prevented to
Pollution and Control of Rooftop Rainwater Harvesting Systems 2099
a significant extent if the rainwater is collected before its further pollution.

These aspects bestow a special virtue to the technique of rooftop harvesting.
At the same time it must be emphasized and brought to public attention
that a rooftop water harvest is not necessarily fit for drinking and contact use.
In fact, unless proper care is taken, a rooftop harvest can be as dangerous
as any other polluted water source.
In this article we present the sources and types of contamination that
may be encountered by a rooftop harvest. The methods to prevent con-
tamination, and to treat the contaminants that come unavoidably, are also
discussed.
The Sources and Types of RTH Contaminants

An RTH can have all of the following types of contaminants: (a) chemical,
(b) microbiological, and (c) physical.
These contaminants can come from the following (Figure 1): (a) the
air that raindrops traverse before hitting the roof (called wet deposition),
(b) the rooftop and drainage pipes, and (c) the storage tank.
The falling raindrops keep picking up chemical and physical contami-
nants from the air as they approach the rooftop. At the best of times these
may include harmless traces of sulfate, nitrite, nitrate, and carbon dioxide.
But if the rain has fallen through plumes of industrial air pollutants, or in
areas where pesticides have been aerially sprayed, it may pick up pollutants
that may be nearer to, or above, the limits that have been set as safe for
drinking (Abbasi and Abbasi, 2000; Khan and Abbasi, 1997a, 1997b, 1999).
As may be seen from the case studies described in the following section,
the quality of runoff from the roof is dependent on the materials used to
construct the roof, the types of material deposited on the roof, and the roof
maintenance. For example, a roof catchment coated with lead paint or with
lead fittings can contribute unacceptably high levels of lead contamination
to stored rainwater (Cunliffe, 1998; Gee, 1993; Simmons et al., 2001). Indeed,
all lead-based paints (including primers) are toxic and not suitable for use
in rooftops designed for collection of rainwater for human consumption.
Acrylic paint may leach dissolved chemicals including detergents in the first
few runoffs after application and these runoffs should not be collected.
Bitumen-based (tar) materials as well are generally not recommended, as
they may leach hazardous substances or cause taste problems.
Roof catchments in major urban and industrial centers can also re-
ceive dry depositionof inorganic and organic contaminants (including
heavy metals) that are derived from heavy traffic, industry, incinerators, and
smelters (Cunliffe, 1998). In some cases the air quality in a region may be so
bad (Abbasi et al., 2009; Abbasi and Khan, 2000; Abbasi and Ramesh, 2003;
Khan and Abbasi, 2001) that the roof runoff in such areas can be totally unfit
for drinking.
FIGURE 1. Pathways of contaminants in the rooftop rainwater harvesting system (adapted

from Martinson and Thomas, 2003) (Color figure available online).
Even as the use of pesticides is coming under increasing scrutiny and

control all over the world, rainwater collected in agricultural areas where
pesticides have been liberally sprayed may be subject to significant contami-
nation. Aerial spraying provides an even greater potential for contamination.
The falling raindrops can also draw in particulates. From such particu-
lates microorganisms and soluble chemicalsif these happen to be associ-
ated with the particulatescan be passed on to the harvest. Otherwise, the
particulates may just add to the turbidity of the water.
The microbiological contaminants occur due to the following:
1. Soil and leaf litter accumulated on the roof, and in the drainage pipes,
particularly if kept damp for long periods due to poor drainage;
2. Fecal material deposited by birds, lizards, mice, rats, and insects;

3. Dead animals and insects either on the rooftop or in the storage tank; or
4. Airborne microorganisms blown in by wind.
These sources can also contribute chemicals (e.g., nitrogen, phospho-

rous, trace metals that occur in feces) and particulates.
It is improbable that human feces or significant amounts of animal fe-
ces will contaminate the roof catchment. Therefore, the risk of transmitting
pathogens that are responsible for major waterborne diseases (e.g., cholera,
typhoid, shigellosis, salmonellosis) to the rainwater tank is not high. How-
ever, the roof catchment can be contaminated with bird and small animal
feces, dust, and leaves. These contaminants can concentrate on the roof
surface during dry periods. Luckily, the hot and dry conditions usually ex-
isting on the roof surface are unfavorable to the survival and growth of
microorganisms, which prefer damp, low-oxygen environments. Moreover,
the ultraviolet radiation falling over rooftops serves as a disinfectant, killing
a large variety of microorganisms due to the energy contained in its short
wavelength. Even visible light, in sufficient intensity, can kill or injure mi-
croorganisms. Some waterborne pathogens such as Campylobacter jejuni
are particularly susceptible to drying. All in all, the exposure to sunlight on
roofs during dry periods may eliminate a considerable amount of harmful
microorganisms from roof catchments. Nevertheless, as seen in the following
section, rainfall runoff from roof catchments in most cases does contribute
bacteria and moderate levels of inorganic chemicals to the stored rainwater.
Such contribution can be very high if the roof is made of certain material
(e.g., thatch, far sheets, poor-quality wood) susceptible to decay.
The purely physical contaminants are particulates that neither carry ad-
hering microorganisms nor contribute any dissolved chemicals (e.g., washed
soil particulates, pieces of plastic). The colored surface of cement-based or
terracotta tiles gets oxidized over time through natural weathering. This oxi-
dized coating may break down slowly and be washed into rainwater tanks,
thus coloring the water. The coating has been found to be nontoxic and, if
left undisturbed, will settle to the bottom of the tank. The color may reappear
after rain if settled material is stirred up by water flowing into the tank. If
this becomes a problem the tank should be drained.
CASE STUDIES: ROOFTOP RAINWATER QUALITY ACROSS

THE WORLD
General
Compared with the enormous body of work that has been done, and is con-
tinuing to be done, on the water quality of ponds, lakes, rivers, groundwater,
estuaries, oceans, and rainwater, much less attention has been paid to the
quality of rooftop rainwater harvests and still less attention has been paid to
its management (Abbasi, 1997a, 1997b, 1997c; Abbasi and Chari, 2005, 2008;
Bhatia and Khobragade, 2005; Sanjay Gandhi, 2008).
Some previous studies claimed that the rainwater stored in tanks has
been of acceptable quality (e.g., Dillaha and Zolan, 1985), but such conclu-
sions were obviously based on incomplete and less than adequately sen-
sitive analysis. Most other studies have found either chemical or microbi-
ological, or both, types of contaminants in the collected rainwater. Often
the contaminants have been found in levels exceeding the international or
national guidelines set for safe drinking water (Chang et al., 2004; Meera
and Ahammed, 2006; Simmons et al., 2001; Verghese and Jaya, 2008). It is
also repeatedly seen that the quality of the harvested and stored rainwater
depends on the characteristics of the individual area, such as topography,
weather conditions, and proximity to pollution sources (Evans et al., 2006;
Sanjay Gandhi, 2008; Vazquez et al., 2003). Water quality is also affected by
the type of the catchment area (Chang et al., 2004; Zhu et al., 2004), the type
of water tank (Dillaha and Zolan, 1985; Evison and Sunna, 2001), and the
handling and management of the water (Evison and Sunna, 2001; Martinson,
2007; Pinfold et al., 1993; Thomas and Martinson, 2007).
Metallic Pollutants
Depending on the nature of the roofing material and the physicochemical
characteristics of the falling rain, the roof can add metallic contaminants to
the rainwater harvest as well as be a means of removing the metals already
present in the falling rain (Athanasiadis et al., 2007; Cao et al., 2009; Forster,
1999; He et al., 2002; Huston et al., 2009; Martinson, 2007; Tsakovski et al.,
2010; Wang et al., 2009). If leaded petrol is used and exhaust fumes exist
in high concentrations in the atmosphere, scouring of the air can be a sig-
nificant source of pollution and the roof may actually play a part in reduc-
ing the concentrations (Quek & Forster, 1993). Conversely, slightly acidic
rain may corrode the roof and leach minerals from roof material itself or
from flushing (Forster, 1999; He et al., 2002; Olem and Berthouex, 1989).
Leaching from metal roofs and flashing tends to raise the levels of zinc,
copper, and sometimes lead (Al-Khashman, 2009; Baez et al., 2007; Hao
et al., 2006). Tiled roofs can also contribute copper and zinc via leaching
of captured minerals (Adeniyi and Olabanji, 2005; Chang et al., 2004; Quek
and Forster, 1993; Rocher et al., 2004). Organic roofs can release chemicals
that have been used to preserve the roofing material, such as arsenic. Almost
all studies have reported that initial concentrations are higher than those in
subsequent runoff, even when the source of the contamination is the atmo-
sphere itself. But when the roof material is a source of contamination, some
concentration of metals remain unchanged throughout the storm (He et al.,
2002).
Several authors (Adeniyi and Olabanji, 2005; Body, 1986, Handia, 2005a,
2005b; Uba and Aghogho, 2000) have reported that harvested rainwater may
contain levels of trace metals well in excess of the permissible limits as
per the drinking water quality standards of the world Health Organization
(WHO) and other agencies (Table 1). But the metals may be removed to
a significant level during the stages of collection, conveyance, and storage
of the rainwater (Gumbs and Dierberg, 1985; Olem and Berthouex, 1989;
Sharp and Young, 1982; Thomas and Martinson, 2007). Precipitation and
sedimentation occurring during storage is a particularly effective mechanism.
When stored, the rain reacts with the walls of the tank leaching calcium,
which reduces the acidity of the water causing dissolved metals to precipitate
out and settle quickly to the bottom of the tank. Metals washed into the tank
as suspended matter are also settled quickly due to their high density. The
sludge at the bottom of the tank shows highly elevated levels of lead and
other metals compared to the levels in the rest of the settled material (Peters
et al., 2008). Another possible route to reduction of trace metals in stored
roofwater is via biofilm action. This is reflected in the work of Spinks et al.
(2003; 2005), who found that metal levels in the stored rainwater are lowered
on storage even in tanks with a plastic liner, which cannot leach calcium.
Apparently the tank sludges and tank wall biofilms play a role in absorption
of heavy metals, evidenced by elevated heavy metal content in the sludge
and wall biofilms.
Effect of Acidic Rain

The rain may be acidicit often iswith pH values as low as at 4.17 (Chang
et al., 2004; Mantovan et al., 1995). Acidic pH facilitates the leaching of
various substances, especially metals, from the collection surfaces, which
deteriorates the quality of harvested rainwater (Abbasi and Soni, 1983, 1984;
Olem and Berthouex, 1989). Rainfall acidity also has the potential of enhanc-
ing the toxicity of certain metals (Abbasi et al., 2009). The pH changes little
on impact with the roof and transport to the tank. However, residence in
TABLE 1. A summary of reports on the metals and metalloids present in rainwater falling on or harvested from rooftops
Samples Number of Metals and Range of
2104
Location/ collected samples metalloids concentrations
Number country from analyzed assayed reported Other salient findings Reference
1. Gdansk, Roof runoff 30 samples Ca, K, Na, Zn Median values of metal Interaction between dust, salt, and Tsakovski
Poland collected concentrations in the runoff secondary aerosol emissions et al., 2010
from 3 from three different roof resulted in high metal levels in of
different 3
types, in mg/dm , were: the samples.
roof Ca: 0.31, 0.435, 0.005 The close proximity of the salt group
surfaces Na: 0.62, 0.46, 0.46 (Na, Cl) and the dust group (Ca,
Zn: 0.066, 0.112, 0.038 Zn) pointed to a common
K: 0.14, 0.15, 0.1 sourceprobably airborne
particles.
2. Guangzhou, Rainwater 78 Na, K, Mg, Ca Concentrations of the metals The volume-weighted mean Cao et al.,
China ( eq /L) were: equivalent concentration of 2009
Na: 55.0 17.3 components followed the order:
K: 32.9 14.5 Ca > Na > K > Mg.
Mg: 17.0 5.2 A Good correlation between Ca2+
Ca: 103.6 14.3 and Mg2+, and between Na+ and
Cl, indicated that these ions
mainly came from crust and
marine sources.
3. Shanghai, Runoff from three 16 Al, Cr, Fe, Cu, Mean concentrations in the Concentrations of Cu, Zn, and Cd in Wang et al.,
China types of roofs: Zn, Cd, Pb runoff from runoff from all the three types of 2009
concrete, concrete/aluminum/glass roof exceeded the National
aluminum, and were: Recommended Water Quality
glass Al: l0.0893/0.882/1.170 Criteria.
Cr: 0.014/0.011/0.014 The soil/liquid partition of the
Fe: 1.220/1.048/1.179 selected metals was consistent for
Cu: 0.036/0.014/0.699 the three roof types; Al, Fe, Zn,
Zn: 0.688/1.129/1.035 and Pb were present mainly in the
Cd: 0.688/1.129/1.035 particle-bound form, while the
Pb: 0.004/0.031/0.014 total loading of Cd was nearly
100% in the dissolved form.
Atmospheric dry precipitation
accounted for most of the pollutant
loadings for all roof types; the roof
material made only a minor
contribution to the loadings.
4. Australia Rainwater storage 175 Zn, Mn, Sr, Average flux of measured mass,% For minor elements the average flux Huston et al., 2009
tank Ba,Pb, Cu, Cr, of total was: from highest to lowest was in the
Se, Ni, As, V, Zn: 45.53 order Fe > Al > Zn > Mn >
Co, Sb, Mo, Li, Sr: 8.55 Sr > Pb > Ba > Cu > Se.
Sn, Cd, Bi Pb: 5.92 Overall the water quality resulting
Cr: 1.81 from the deposition wet to dry
Ni: 1.03 was good but 10.3%, 1.7%, and
V: 0.90 17.7% of samples had
Sb: 0.50 concentrations of Pb, Cd, and Fe,
Li: 0.37 respectively, greater than the
Cd: 0.32 Australian Drinking Water
Mn: 16.06 Guidelines (ADWG).
Ba: 7.27 In comparison, 14.2% and 6.1% of
Cu: 5.52 tank samples had total Pb and Zn
Se: 1.76 concentrations exceeding the
As: 0.97 ADWG.
Co: 0.72
Mo: 0.48
Sn: 0.35
Bi: 0.18
5. Northern Harvested 90 Pb, Fe, Cr Range of concentration, Water quality in the tanks and Radaideh et al.,
Jordan rainwater minimum/maximum (in mg/L) cisterns was seen to vary 2009
storage tanks were: depending on location, catchment
Pb: 0.23/4.41 area, and availability of public
Fe: 0.00/0.338 sanitary systems. It was concluded
Cr: 0.00/0.0338 that collected rainwater was
unsuitable for drinking purpose
unless subjected to prior treatment
but it could be used for irrigation.
6. West Jordan Rainwater 35 Fe, Al, Zn, Pb, Mean concentrations of trace The relative abundance in rainwater Al-Khashman,
Cu Cd, Ni metals in rainwater samples was in the order Fe > Al > Pb > 2009
(in ppb) and standard deviations, Cu > Zn > Cd.
were: The main sources of trace metals in
Fe: 430 75.51 rainwater were anthropogenic.
Al: 324 61.74
Zn: 210 44.21
Pb: 66 33.25
Cu: 73 23.10
Cd: 52 19.13
Ni: 3.5 2.24
Cr: 3.1 2.01
2105
(Continued on next page)
TABLE 1. A summary of reports on the metals and metalloids present in rainwater falling on or harvested from rooftops (Continued)
2106
7. Irbid, Jordan Rainwater 28 Al, Ba, Bi, Cd, Range of metal Mean trace metal concentrations Al-Momani et al.,
Co, Cr, Cu, concentrations in the were similar or lesser than those 2008
Mn, Mo, Ni, precipitation (g/L) reported for other urban regions
Pb, Sb, were: worldwide. High Ca concentrations
V, Zn, Fe, Sr, Al: 6.1395.0 were attributed to the calcareous
Mg, Ca, Na, Ba: 0.346.0 nature of the local soil and to the
K Bi: 0.052.80 influence of the Saharan dust.
Cd: 0.051.90 The annual wet deposition fluxes of
Co: 0.030.51 trace metals were much lower than
Cr: 0.104.60 those reported for other urban
Cu: 0.7017.00 areas worldwide.
Mn: 0.0712.00
Mo: 0.100.70
Ni: 0.304.70
Pb: 1.983.60
Sb: 0.080.47
V : 0.037.80
Zn: 1.4370.0
Fe: 4.088.0
Sr: 6.00130.00
8. Nagpur, India Rainwater 21 Na, Ca, K, Mg Minimum, maximum, and Of the four metals, Ca had the Salve et al., 2008
mean metal levels highest concentration (29.7%),
(eq/L) were: followed by sodium (12.4%),
Na: 8.215.6, 12.1 magnesium (3.3%), and potassium
Ca: 22.542.5, 29.1 (2.3%).
K : 1.14.9, 2.3
Mg: 1.87.1, 3.3
9. Ile-Ife, Nigeria Rainwater 11 sites Ca, Mg, Na, K, Na, Mg, and K occurred in Concentration values showed an Adeniyi and
the concentration range increase with the age of roof Olabanji, 2005
of 0.111.00 mg/L, their materials, especially the runoff
relative concentrations from adex and concrete slate roofs.
were in the order Na > The harvests were not potable
K > Mg. Ca occurred in without necessary treatment but
the range of 1.0110.00 were suitable for a wide range of
mg/L. other applications.
10. Tokyo, Japan Rainwater Pb isotopes The ratios of 206Pb/204Pb and Pb concentration in rainfall decayed Hattori et al.,
207
Pb/204Pb were about 17:9 according to a power law function 2008
and 15:5, respectively along with rainfall depth.
Pb isotope ratios changed during a
single rainfall event.
11. Bermuda Cistern water and 1I2 Fe, Mn, Ag, Al, Mean metals concentrations and The chemical quality of water was Peters et al.,
sediments As, B, Ba, Be, minimum maximum values good; the health-based drinking 2008
Bi, Cd, Co, Cr, in water standards of Bermuda and
Cu, Mo, Ni, (in g/L) were: USEPA were violated in only less
Pb, Sb, Se, Sn, Fe: 17 (< 0.5330) than 1% of the samples for Pb and Se.
Sr, Ti, Tl, U, Mn: trace (< 111) Sediments which accumulate in the
V, Zn, Hg, Ag: trace(< 0.40.70) water cisterns were found to have
and major Al: 130 (< 20690) elevated concentrations of some
2+ +
ions Ca , K , As: trace(< 0.41.8) elements, similar to local soil. In
Na+ B: trace(< 20360) particular, the concentration of As in
Ba: 5.0 (1.231) cistern sediments exceeded the
Be: not detectable USEPA generic soil screening limits
Bi: trace (< 0.815) (SSL) for human ingestion of soil at
Cd: trace (< 0.20.40) all 36 locations sampled. Additionally,

Co: not detectable Pb and Hg exceeded the SSL at 4
Cr: 0.98 (< 0.815) (11%) and 1(3%) sites, respectively.
Cu: 1.9 (< 174)
Mo: 0.20 (< 0.1 1.3)
Ni: trace (< 0.22.0)
Pb: 0.47 (< 0.117)
Sb: 0.86 (0.402.9)
Se: 0.62 (< 0.422)
Sn: trace (< 0.40.80)
S: 160 (301,700)
Ti: trace (<521)
Tl: trace (< 0.10.20)
U: trace (< 0.10.50),
V: 2.6 (< 4480)
Zn: 23(< 4480)
Hg: trace (< 0.20.50)
Major ion
concentrationsmeans and
minimummaximum values
(in mg/L)were:
Ca2+: 15 (5.4120)
K+: 1.2 (0.125)
Na/+: 13 (2.0390)
2107
Mg+: 1.5 (2.0390)
2108
12. Munich, Runoff from 30 rain events Cu Copper mass in the roof runoff Cover material of the roof and the Athanasiadis
Germany copper roof was in the range 00.2 g/L. drainage system were responsible et al.,
for the high copper concentrations 2007
in the roof runoff. The rain height
and the rain intensity were
significant in the establishment of
the copper runoff rate.
The mean measured copper
concentration in percolation water
was lower than the critical value of
50 mg/L set by the German Federal
Soil Protection Act and Ordinance,
indicating no risk of soil and
groundwater contamination.
13. Kefalonia Ferroconcrete 300 samples across Fe, Mn, Cd, Pb, Median values and ranges The samples met the requirements Sazakli
Island, storage tanks 12 seasons Cu, Cr, Ni, and were, in g/L: for safe drinking water in terms of et al.,
Greece adjacent to Zn Fe: < 0.01 (640) physical and chemical 2007
cement paved Mn: 0.6 (0.573.0) composition. The pH values,
catchment areas Cd: 0.05 (0.100.19) ranging from 7.63 to 8.80, indicate
Pd: < 2.0 (2.06.9) that the rain was not acidic. In this
Cr: < 2.59 (2.513.0) pH range, undesirable chemical
Cu: 1.3(1.34.8) reactions do not occur during the
Ni: 10.0< (10.012.2) storage. The only issue of concern
Zn: 10.0(10.077.0) was the absolute lack of fluoride.
In cases of utilization of the
rainwater as the only source of
drinking water, consumers should
be advised to take fluoride
supplementation.
14. Mexico Rainwater 81 Al, Cd, Cr, Mn, Volume-weighted mean Aluminum presented the highest Baez et al.,
Ni, Pb, V concentrations (VWMC), VWMC in both insoluble and 2007
and standard deviations of soluble fractions.
the In the insoluble fractions, the VWMC
VWMC were, in g/L: of the other trace metals decreased
Al: 15.3 1.66 in the order Mn > Pb > Ni > V >
Cd: 0.37 0.04 Cr > Cd, and in the soluble
Cr: 0.26 0.03 fractions in the order Mn > V >
Mn: 8.34 1.29 Ni > Pb > Cd > Cr.
Ni: 2.98 0.57 Trace metal concentrations were not
Pb: 1.58 0.28 clearly related to wind direction.
V: 4.78 0.96 The high enrichment factors suggest
that, in general, trace metals and
major ions have an anthropogenic
origin.
The solubility of trace metals did not
depend on rainwater pH. As
expected, Al presented the highest
wet deposition flux.
15. Mugla, Turkey Rainwater 30 rain events Na, K, Ca. Mean concentrations, with The equivalent concentration of Demirak
range, of the three metals components followed the order et al.,
assayed (in eg/L) were: Ca2+>Na+>K+. 2006
Na: 17 (307) The dust-rich local and surrounding
K: 3.5 (81) limestone environment might have
Ca: 174 (28093) caused the high concentration of
Ca2+ that was observed.
16. Augustenborg, Vegetated roofs Several rain events Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Estimated annual contribution Vegetated roofs were a source of Berndtsson
Sweden K, Mn, Pb, due to leakage from contaminants. While contributing et al.,
Zn vegetated roof (mg/m2 contaminants in concentrations 2006
year), were: lower than normally found in
Cr: 0.07 urban runoff, some metals
Cu: 5.72 appeared in concentrations that
Fe: 15.40 would correspond to moderately
Mn: 1.10 polluted natural water.
Pb: 0.15 Cadmium concentrations in both
Zn: 7.11 rain water samples and roof runoff
samples were below the detection
limit. The chromium content in
vegetated roof runoff remained
2109
2110
within the same range as in Berndtsson
precipitation and there were no et al.,
identifiable trends of any 2006
prevailing sources.
Copper content in the roof runoff
was comparable to copper content
of precipitation and the tile roof
runoff.
The concentrations of zinc, copper,
and lead in runoff were generally
lower than the values typical for
urban runoff.
17. Bordeaux, Rain water 396 Na, K, Mg, Ca, Mean values and range of The ionic concentrations are in Beysens
France Zn, Cu concentrations (mg/L) general lower in dew than in rain. et al.,
found were: Average ionic concentrations were 2006
Na: 4.18 (0.122.4) within the World Health
K: 0.33 (0.021.4) Organization limits for potable
Ca: 1.52 (< 1045.6) water; dew composition was close
Mg: 0.56 (< 1045) to low mineralized commercial
Zn: 0.14 (0.0250.445) spring waters for the analyzed ions.
Cu: 0.0088 (1040.03)
18. Victoria and 49 rainwater As, Cr, Pb, Cd, Australian Drinking Water The metal concentrations were Spinks
South tanks Cu, Fe, Zn Standards (ADWS) and the within the ADWS acceptable limits et al.,
Australia range of concentrations (in in most samples with the 2006
mg/L) found in the exception of cadmium.
rainwater tanks were:
Ar: 0.007 (<0.0010.007)
Cd: 0.002 (<0.00020.0067)
Cr: 0.05 (0.0010.008)
Cu: 2 (0.0050.58)
Fe: 0.3 (0.050.78)
Pb: 0.01 (0.0010.006)
Zn: 3 (0.00317)
19. Beijing, China Harvested rainwater 175 Ca, Fe, Mn Average concentrations (mg/L) Concentrations of all metals in roof Hao et al.,
in the roof runoff were: runoff were higher than the 2006
Ca: 8.14 corresponding concentrations in
Mg: 1.22 rainwater.
Fe: 0.228
Mn: 0.029
20. Korea Roof runoff, roof 5 Fe, Cu, Zn Concentrations (mg/L) in storage The roof runoff had the best water Kim et al.,
garden runoff, tank/runoff from roof/runoff quality. The stored rainwater had 2005
storage tank from roof garden were: similar quality except for conductivity
Fe: 0.033/0.02/0.06 and color.
Cr: 0.054/0.04/0.17 The runoff from roof garden contained
Zn: 0.15/0.08/0.14 many more pollutants than simple
roof. These additional amounts of
pollutants appear to come from the
soil layer, in the roof garden system.
21. Ile-Ife, Nigeria Runoff from five Al, Cr, Fe, Zn, Pb, The mean mass concentrations of Samples over each roof type (except Adeniyi and
roof types Mn, Ni, Cu, Cd the trace metals in the slate) were characterized by relatively Olabanji,
roof-intercepted samples were high enrichment of one or two metals. 2005
within the following three But, in general, the high enrichment of
ranges: these metals do not potent any health
< 0.01 mg/L: Ni > Cu > Cd risk in view of their relatively low
0.010.10 mg/L: Cr > Fe > Pb concentrations and compliance with
> Mn WHO guidelines for drinking.
> 0.10 mg/L: A1 > Zn The relatively high enrichment of
copper and manganese in thatch roof
samples could be due to the fact that
the roofing materials (palm fronds)
were collected from a cocoa plantation
frequently sprayed with pesticides of
which copper sulfate was an important
active ingredient.
22. Lusaka, Zambia Rainwater, roof 9 sites Fe, Pb, Zn Range of concentrations (mg/L) 10% of the roof water exceeded WHO Handia,
runoff, and in roof runoff were: limits for Pb and Zn in drinking water. 2005a,
storage tank Fe: <0.01 The pH in the storage tank was higher 2005b
Pb: <0.0010.27 than that in rainwater and roof runoff
Zn: <0.0013.16 due to the reaction with the
The range of levels in storage ferrocement tank.
tanks were: It was expected that as the ferrocement
Pb: <0.00114 tanks matured, pH would drop in the
Zn: <0.0010.961 storage water and probably meet the
WHO guidelines.
2111
2112
23. Le Marais, Runoff from three Ca, K, Mg, Na, Total heavy metal fluxes Atmospheric fluxes of Na, K, Ca, and Rocher
France types of roofs Ba, Cd, Co, Cr, (mg/ha. day) for different Mg increase during cold seasons, et al.,
Cu, Mn, Ni, seasons (Win- due to residential heating 2004
Pb, Sb, Sr, V, ter/Spring/Summer/Fall) occurrence, while heavy metals,
Ti, and Zn estimated were: whose major sources have
2300/2800/2800/2800, constant emission fluxes, exhibit
respectively. steady atmospheric loads
throughout the year.
The findings of roof runoff
contamination suggest that the
scavenging processes of metals are
dependent on rainfall amount
rather than on the rain event
characteristics (number, intensity,
duration), and dry deposition
makes only a week contribution to
the pollutant loads in the roof
runoff.
Results also highlight that both
metallic and slate roofs act as a
source of some heavy metals.
Zinc-covered roofs largely release
Zn and Ti, while slate roofs mainly
release Pb, Ti, and Cu. Whatever
the material used for roof covering,
roof runoff presents high Ni and V
loads due to the vicinity of
chimney stacks of boilers.
24. Loess Plateau Harvested Na, K, Ca, Mg, Metal concentrations in Concentration of metals and Zhu et al.,
China rainwater B, Ba, Fe, rainwater harvested from metalloids in the rainwater 2004
Mn, Cu, Al, roof and yard (mg/L) were: harvested from roof-yard
Ni, Pb, As, Na: 3.0211.2 100 catchment systems generally
Cr, Hg, Cd, K: 3.368.65820 complied with the WHO standards
Se. Ca: 11.231.1575 for drinking water.
Mg: 0.9301.14330 While the concentrations of some

B: 0.0110.0561.0 inorganic compounds in the rainwater
Ba: 00.01121.0 collected from land and road surfaces
Fe: 0.0100.0830.3 appeared to be higher than the WHO
Mn: 0.0480.1120.05 guideline for drinking water, they
Cu: 0.00110.0160.2 were generally not beyond the
Al: 0.0930.3360.05 maximum permissible concentrations.
Ni: UD 0.05
Pb: 0.0030.041 0.05
As: UD 0.05
Cr : UD 0.05
Hg: UD 0.001
Cd: UD 0.005
Se: 0.0040.009 0.01
(UD = undetectable)
25. Gdansk, Poland Runoff from different 272 Na, K, Mg, Ca Concentrations (meq/dm3), Highest concentration of calcium was Polkowska,
types of roofs in runoff from different types of noted in samples taken from roofs 2004
roofing were: made up of roofing tiles and Eternit.
Tar-board
K: 0.50
Mg: 1.30
Ca: 4.28
Ceramic roofing tile
Na:1.13,
Eternit:
K: 0.05
Mg2+: 0.07
Ca: 1.92,
Na: 0.11
Sheet-metal roofing tile
K: 0.05
Mg2+: 0.04
Ca: 0.27
Na: 0.20
Zinc-coated sheet metal
K: 0.07, Mg: 0.07
Ca: 1.20 Na: 0.11
Bituminousboard
K: 0.01
Mg: 0.06
Ca: 0.59
Na: 0.08
Teflon
K: 0.03
Mg: 0.02
2113
Ca: 0.08
Na: 0.04
2114
26. Texas, USA Runoff from four 31 storms Cu, Mn, Pb, Zn, Median values for different Concentrations of Pb, Cu, and Zn in Chang
different roof Mg, Al roof types in mg/L were: rainwater exceed the EPA et al.,
types (wood Al: 0.1690.224 freshwater quality standards even 2004
shingle, Mg: 0.2920.646 without pollutant inputs from
composition Mn: 0.010.022 roofs.
shingle, Cu: 0.0180.22 Zn and Cu were the two most
aluminum, and Pb: 0.025 serious pollutants in roof runoff,
galvanized iron) Zn: 0.8599.717 and exceeded the EPA national
freshwater water quality standards
in close to 100% and 60% of the
samples, respectively.
pH, EC, and Zn were the only three
variables significantly affected by
roofing materials. Differences in Zn
concentrations were significant
among all roof types and between
all roof runoff and rainwater
samples. Although there were no
differences in Cu concentrations
among all roof types and between
roof runoff and rainwater, all
means and medians of runoff and
rainwater exceeded the national
water quality standards.
Water quality from wood shingles
was the worst among the roof
types studied. Also, Zn
concentrations from new
wood-shingle roofs were
significantly higher than those from
aged roofs of a previous study.
The study demonstrates that roofs
could be a serious source of
nonpoint water pollution.
27. Austin, USA Rooftop runoff As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Concentrations of elements in The contribution of rooftop runoff to Van Metre
Hg, Ni, Pb, Zn rooftop particles (mg/kg) were: watershed loading was estimated to and
As: 6.233 ranged from 6% for chromium and Mahler,
Cd: 1.47.6 arsenic to 55% for zinc. Estimated 2003
Cr: 26111 contributions from roofing material to
Cu: 35149 total watershed load were greatest for
Hg: 0.041.06 zinc and lead were about 20% and
Ni: 2369 18%, respectively.
Pb: 100370 The contribution from atmospheric
Zn: 3906200 deposition of particles onto rooftops
to total watershed loads in stormwater
was estimated to be greatest for
mercury, contributing about 46%.
The contribution of rooftop runoff for
particle-bound trace elements was in
the order Zn>Hg>Pb>Cd>Cu
Ni>Cr>As.
28. Singapore Rainwater 110 Na, K, Mg, Ca. The metal ion concentrations, Concentration of metals in the Hu et al.,
eq/L, were in the range: precipitation fallowed the order: 2003
+ 2+ 2+ +
Na: 69.5820.80 Na >Ca >Mg >K .
K: 22.783.60 Local meteorological conditions were
Mg: 12.683.42 seen to influence the chemical
Ca: 63.248.11 compositions to a significant extent.
The pollutants in rainwater were
apparently derived from long range as
well as local sources.
29. Batoka, Zambia Roof water harvested Pb, Zn Pb levels in either tank were lesser In terms of concentrations of Pb and Zn, Handia et al.,
in concrete and than 6.01 mg/L. Zn levels were the harvested water complied with the 2003
cement tanks 0.62 and 0.67 mg/L in concrete WHO guidelines.
and brick tanks, respectively.
30. Madrid Rainwater 164 Na, K, Mg, Ca The mean and maximum The origin of sulfate was both Hontoria
minimum values of metal anthropogenic and natural. The et al., 2003
concentrations ( mol/ L) marine influence did not seem to be
were: relevant, but the soil appeared to play
Na: 94 (35717) an important role in the composition
K: 35 (279- 0) of the precipitation.
Mg: 27 (164 -4) There were differences in precipitation
Ca: 273(17503) chemistry between seasons, with
higher concentrations of sulfate and
chloride in the autumn and winter and
of calcium and sodium in the summer.
The intensity of human activity and
the origin of rain fronts during the
humid period might be the cause of
2115
this difference.
2116
31. Stockholm, Laboratory 33 Cu Samples with cuprous oxide as the Zhang
Sweden simulated rain dominating phase of the patina (16 et al.,
on patinated months) showed higher and 2002
copper roofs of somewhat increasing corrosion
varying age rates during a rain event (from 0.6
to 1.2 m/y). During a continuous
rain event, corrosion rates were
found to be approximately 10
(brownish patina) and 25 times
(greenish patina) lower than
corresponding instantaneous
runoff rates.
32. Gdansk, Runoff from 7 45 Na, K, Mg, Ca The metal concentrations ranged Polkowska
Poland different roof from 0.11 to 1.66 meq/L. Na+, K+, et al.,
types and Ca2+ were detected in all 2002
samples, with the highest
concentrations recorded for Na+
and Ca2+
33. Paris, France Roof catchment 31 rain Events Cd, Cu, Pb, Zn Median of metal levels (g/L) High concentrations of Zn and Cd Gromaire
found in roof runoff were: were observed in the runoff from et al.,
Cd: 0.7 Zn roof, and Pb in the runoff from 2001
Cu: 43 slate roof.
Pb: 392
Zn: 2998
34. Auckland, Water faucet 125 Zn, Cu, Pb, As Median values (mg/L) of the 14.4% samples exceeded maximum Simmons
New metals were: acceptable values of Pb set in the et al.,
Zealand Pb: 0.01 New Zealand Drinking Water 2001
Cu: 0.06 Standards. For Cu, Zn and As 2.4%,
Zn: 0.4 0.8% and 7.1% sample exceeded
As: 0.005 maximum acceptable limits.
35. Maryland, USA Roof runoff 38 Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb Median values of the metals Metal levels in the roof runoff from Davis et al.,
(g/L) in the roof runoff from institutional and commercial buildings 2001
residential, commercial, and were higher than that in residential
institutional buildings were: buildings.
Pb: 2, 12, 64
Cu: 7, 29, 2100
Cd: 0.1, 0.7, 0.4
Zn: 110, 760, 460
36. Dubendorf, Roof runoff 14 rain events Cu, Zn, Pb, Cd, Concentration (mg/L) in the first The roof and its drains acted as a source Zobrist
Switzerland Cr, Mn, Fe 0.2 mm runoff depth were: for Cu. Metal parts exposed to the et al., 2000
Cr: 0.61.7 atmosphere were weathered
Fe: 90415 (corroded) and the products were
Pb: 2.741 apparently washed off by rainwater.
Zn: 9115
Cu: 18842
Cd: 0.10.4
37. Irbid, Jordan Rainwater 67 Na, K, Mg, Ca. Concentrations of metals, The rainwater quality appeared to be Al-Momani
eq/ L, were: strongly influenced by natural sources et al., 2000
Na: 83.9 rather than anthropogenic sources.
K: 9.5 The ionic abundance had the trend
Mg: 39.8 Ca2+>Na+>Mg2+>K+.
Ca: 131.3
38. Zurich, Roof runoff 50 Ca, Mg, Na, K Cd, Concentration ranges of light For all metals, the total dry plus wet Mason, et al.,
Switzerland Cu, Zn, Cr, Pb metals (in mm) after first flush atmospheric deposition exceeded the 1999
were: total metal load in roof runoff.
Ca: 0.10.5 Only a fraction of the metals deposited
Mg: 0.010.04 on the roof was washed off by the
Na: 0.020.20 rain. For instance, only 4267% Cr,
K: 0.020.0. 3945% Cu, 1823% Zn, 2254% Cd,
The concentrations of heavy and 69% Pb were washed off the
metals after the first flush roof in the three rain events studied.
(g/L) were:
Cd: < 0.010.47
Cu: 1.011.6
Cr: 0.20.7
Zn: < 0.0587
Pb: < 0.010.07
2117
2118
39. Zurich, Roof catchment Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb Average concentrations from tile Storm water from roof accounted for Boller, 1997
Switzerland and polyester roofs were: 60% Cu in combined sewer.
Pb: 16 mg/L
Cd: 0.17 mg/L
Cu: 225 mg/L
Zn: 42 mg/L
40. Malaysia Runoff from a tile 48 Zn, Pb Average concentrations in the The average zinc concentrations in the Yaziz et al.,
and a galvanized runoff from galvanized iron runoff from the galvanized iron roof 1989
iron roof roof (g/L) were: was about fivefold higher compared
Zn: 294497 to the tile roof, indicating leaching
Pb: 145254 action but was well below the WHO
Average concentrations in the limits for drinking water quality.
runoff from tile roof (g/L) Lead concentrations remained
were: consistently high in all samples and
Zn: 48193 exceeded the WHO guidelines by a
Pb: 102271 factor of 3.5.
The longer the dry period in between
rainfall events, the greater is the
amount of pollutants deposited on
the roof surfaces.
a tank, particularly one made of concrete or mortar, significantly raises the

pH of the water as the soft, acidic, rainwater reacts with the cement and
absorbs calcium making the stored water more alkaline in the range of pH
610 (Ariyananda, 2005; Fujioka et al., 1991; Handia, 2005a, 2005b; Olem and
Berthouex, 1989; Thurman, 1995). If the material of the tank wall has cracks
and large porosity, the dissolution by acidic water is accelerated (Okochi et
al., 2000). This facilitates the removal of metallic contaminants, as described
in the preceding section.
Organic Pollutants
Organic pollutants derived from the burning of fossil fuels, fuel leakage of
vehicles, petrochemical and plastic-chemical industries, and pesticide appli-

cation can contaminate the collected rainwater (Huston et al., 2009; Khan
and Abbasi, 1999; Sazakli et al., 2007; Tsakovski et al., 2010; Zhu et al.,
2004). Polkowska et al. (2002; 2006; 2009) found higher concentrations of
petroleum hydrocarbons such as toluene in the harvest from a roof covered
with tar paper. Most of the organic pollutants appear in high concentration
in the first minutes or first tenth of a millimeter of runoff depth (Zobrist
et al., 2000). A polyester roof was seen to act as a conveyor of pesticides,
but gravel and tile roofs seemed to retain pesticides. High concentrations
of pesticides of organochlorine (aldrine and lindane), organonitrogen, and
organophosphorus groups (e.g., propazine, malathion, fenitrothion) were
detected in runoff from metallic surfaces by Polkowska et al. (2002). Forster
(1996), Van Metre and Mahler (2003), Rocher et al. (2004), and Spinks et al.
(2006) also detected organic micropollutants in harvests from different types
of roofs. An insecticide, g-HCH, showed no significant differences in runoff
from different types of roof surfaces, except for fibrous cement where the
porous material was able to absorb g-HCH from the gas phase during dry
periods (Forster, 1998).
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), largely the product of incom-
plete combustion of petroleum, oil, and coal, represent the largest class of
suspected carcinogens prevalent in urban atmospheric deposition. PAH con-
centration was found high for clay tiles in an urban locality in Paris (Moilleron
et al., 2002). The higher concentration of these compounds in roof runoff
compared with that in precipitation indicated that these were released from
roofing materials (Forster, 1996; Polkowska et al., 2002; Polkowska et al.,
2006; Polkowska et al., 2009). A summary of reports on the levels of organic
pollutants present in roof runoff is presented as Table 2.
Microbiological Contaminants
The use of rainwater harvested from rooftops has been linked to a num-
ber of instances of human infection (Brodribb et al., 1995; Eberhart-Phillips
2120
TABLE 2. A summary of reports on the organics present in rooftop rainwater harvests
Samples Number of
Location/ collected samples Parameters
Number country from analyzed tested Concentrations Comments Reference
1. Gdansk, Roof runoff 30 samples Acenaphtylene, From 14 samples collected from The authors speculate that the Tsakovski
Poland collected Phenanthrene, ceramic tile roof 1: presence of phenanthrene, et al.,
from 3 Fluoranthene, Acenaphtylene: 1.322.9 ng/L fluoranthene, chryzene, 2010
different Pyrene, Phenanthrene: 30216 ng/L benzo[a]anthracene, and pyrene is
roof Benzo[a]anthracene, Fluoranthene: 19256 ng/L due mainly to combustion
surfaces Chryzene. Pyrene: 15206 ng/L processes involving burning of
Benzo[a]anthracene: 1.362 biomass, coke ovens, diesel, and
ng/L gasoline engine fuels. PCBs are
Chryzene: 1.4112.5 ng/LPCB released mainly from PCBs
52: 102411 g/L containing products used in the
PCB 180: 10269 g/L industry and in the industrial
From 6 samples collected from combustion processes.
ceramic tile roof 2:
Acenaphtylene: 3.536 ng/L
Phenanthrene: 43132 ng/L
Fluoranthene: 2131 3 ng/L
Pyrene: 17162 ng/L
Benzo[a]anthracene: 1.323
ng/L
Chryzene: 1.440.3 ng/LPCB
52: 77463 g/L
PCB 180: 38185 g/L
From 10 samples collected from
a zinc roof:
Acenaphtylene: 1.344.8 ng/L
Phenanthrene: 28240 ng/L
Fluoranthene : 28210 ng/L
Pyrene: 18143 ng/L
Benzo[a]anthracene: 1.340.2
ng/L
Chryzene: 1.463 ng/LPCB 52:
10622 g/L
PCB 180: 10262 g/L
2. Gdansk, Poland Roof 68 Organonitrogen and Most of the samples contained a The type of the roofing material had a Polkowska
organophosphorus few thousand ng/L of significant effect on the pesticide et al.,
pesticides: organochlorine pesticides, and levels in runoff waters. The highest 2009
Simazine a few tens to a few hundred analyte levels were recorded in
Atrazine ng/L of organonitrogen and October and November, when the
Propazine organophosphorus pesticides: temperature was the highest.
Terbutylazine Tar paper: Pesticide levels in runoff were higher
Bromophos Organochlorine (ng/L): than in precipitation for samples
Malathion 80019970 collected from roofs covered with tar
Chlorfenvinfos Organonitrogen and paper, galvanized sheet metal and
Fenitrothion organophosphorus (ng/L): asbestos cement corrugated sheets,
Organochlorine 301070 which indicates that the roofing
pesticides: Bituminous membrane: materials contributed to the
a-HCH Organochlorine (ng/L): 1680 pollution of runoff waters.
g-HCH (lindane) Organonitrogen and
Aldrine organophosphorus (ng/L): 50
Heptachlor epoxide Ceramic roofing tiles:
o,p -DDE Organochlorine (ng/L):
p,p -DDD 6009050
o,p -DDD Organonitrogen and
p,p -DDE organophosphorus (ng/L):
o,p -DDT 202720
p,p -DDT Metal roofing tiles:
Methoxychlor Organochlorine (ng/L):
10703490
Organonitrogen and
organophosphorus (ng/L):
ND5203
Painted galvanized sheet metal:
Organochlorine (ng/L):
46015450
Organonitrogen and
ND3670
Asbestos cement corrugated sheets:
Organochlorine (ng/L):
37014540
Organonitrogen and
ND1520
Pesticides and their
concentrations in ng/L detected
most often for the given roofing:
2121
TABLE 2. A summary of reports on the organics present in rooftop rainwater harvests (Continued)
Number
Samples of
2122
Tar paper:
Aldrine (6020), methoxychlor (430),
heptachlor epoxide (19970), p,p -DDD
(520), o,p -DDE (540), o,p -DDD (340),
p,p -DDE (450), o,p -DDT (190),
p,p -DDT (370), a-HCH (200), g-HCH
(400), propazine (1070), terbutylazine
(120)
Bituminous membrane:
Heptachlor epoxide(1680), bromophos
(50)
Ceramic roofing tiles:
heptachlor epoxide (430),
p,p -DDD(4610), o,p -DDE (2800), o,p
DDD(1210), p,p -DDE (1360), p,p -DDT
(1080), a-HCH(740), g-HCH(600),
propazine (1110), terbutylazine (120),
bromophos (2720)
Metal roofing tiles:
Heptachlor epoxide(1640), o,p -DDE
(920), o,p -DDD (1890), p,p -DDE (680),
o,p -DDT (490), p,p -DDT (830), a-HCH
(320), g-HCH (500), propazine (400),
bromophos (4,912), atrazine (2,980),
simazine (620), malathion (1,960),
fenitrothion (630), chlorfenvinfos (180)
Asbestos cement corrugated sheets:
heptachlor epoxide (14540), p,p -DDD
(500), o,p -DDE (4640), o,p -DDD (7040),
p,p -DDE (1040), o,p -DDT (750),
p,p -DDT (8460), a-HCH (460), g-HCH
(840), atrazine (1210), terbutylazine (130),
bromophos (310)
The range of concentration, the mean
concentration, and the frequency with
which the various organochlorine,
organonitrogen and organophosphorus
pesticides were found:
Simazine: 160620 (Mean 420), 4.4%

Atrazine: 3603460 (Mean 1710), 7.4%
Propazine: 1901110 (Mean 690), 5.9%
Terbutylazine: 40130 (Mean 90), 8.8%
Bromophos: 204911 (Mean 1820),
45.6%
Malathion: 201960 (Mean 510), 10.3%
Chlorfenvinfos: 50180 (Mean 110), 5.9%
Fenitrothion: 50630 (Mean 260), 7.4%
-HCH: 501690 (Mean 450), 16.2%
-HCH (lindane): 70840 (Mean 430),
13.2%
Aldrine: 1301970 (Mean 1330), 11.8%
Heptachlor epoxide:
39019970 (Mean 2520), 32.4%
o,p - DDE: 290 7470 (Mean 2180),
17.6%
p,p -DDD: 2804610 (Mean 1060), 11.8%
o,p -DDD: 3107660 (Mean 2250), 19.1%
p,p -DDE: 505150 (Mean 890), 22.1%
o,p -DDT: 130750 (Mean 380), 16.2%
p,p -DDT: 908460 (Mean 1590), 11.8%
Methoxychlor: 40430 (Mean 160),
10.3%
3. Australia Rainwater storage tank 15 122 herbicides Other than the compounds listed below, Huston et al.,
and pesticides, all the other compounds analyzed for 2009
17 PAHs, and were below detection limits. Even the
16 phenolics ones that were above detection limits
were analyzed. were still below the Australian Drinking
Water Guidelines (ADWG) limits.
The maximum concentration of only the
compounds that were at concentrations
above five times:
4-Methylphenol: 0.7 g/L
Anthracene: 0.013 g/L
Naphthalene: 0.054 g/L
Diuron: 0.79 g/L
Simazine: 0.01 g/L
Terbutryn: 0.01 g/L
2123
2124
Samples Number of
4. Kefalonia, Ferroconcrete storage 156 samples Polycyclic aromatic PAHs, OCPs, and VOCs were The quality of water harvested from Sazakli et al.,
Island, tanks adjacent to across 12 hydrocarbons (PAHs); not detected in any samples. cement-paved catchment areas and 2007
Greece cement paved seasons organochlorine The tests for these were stored in tanks to be subsequently
catchment areas pesticides (OCPs); conducted according to the used for distribution has been
volatile organic standard methods for the studied by the authors. The authors
compounds (VOCs). examination of water and also studied other chemical and
wastewater (APHA, 1995). microbiological parameters, which
have been summarized in the other
tables in this article.
3
5. Gdansk, Poland Roof runoff 19 Formaldehyde 0.051.37 mg/dm A strong correlation exists between Polkowska
3
Mean: 0.540 mg/dm traffic intensity and formaldehyde et al.,
68% of the samples analyzed concentrations in precipitation and 2006
contained formaldehyde. runoff.
6. Victoria and 49 rainwater tanks PAHs, including All the samples were below The concentration of organic matter Spinks et al.,
South benzo(a)pyrene; VOCs the detectable level of 1 contamination in harvested and 2006
Australia including benzene, mg/L for benzo(a)pyrene, stored rainwater as a result of smoke
toluene, ethylbenzene, benzene, toluene, and ash from bushfires was found to
and xylene (BTEX); total ethylbenzene, and xylene. be lying within the limit set by
organic carbon All the PAHs were below the Australian Drinking Water
detectable level of 8 mg/L. Guidelines (ADWG) showing that it
is unlikely that bushfires could pose
a threat to public health via roof
water collected and stored following
bushfires
7. Le Marais, Runoff from three Total aliphatic TAH flux: 401500 mg/ha per The rainfall amount rather than the Rocher et al.,
France types of roofs hydrocarbons (TAHs) day number, intensity, and duration of 2004
and PAHs PAH flux: 0.615 mg/ha per the rain events influences the roof
day runoff contamination. Dry
deposition is stated to have only a
weak contribution to contaminant
levels in roof runoff. The results of
the study also underscore the fact
that metallic and slate roofs do not
act as a source of hydrocarbons.
8. Loess Plateau, Cistern water quality 12 cisterns Aliphatic hydrocarbons, Total organic concentration (TOC) The total organic concentration of cistern Zhu et al.,
China from roof and yard aromatic compounds, during the dry season: 0.22 mg/L water during the dry season was just a 2004
runoff and phthalates and Total organic concentration including little above the WHO (1984)
phosphate esters: first-flush water during rainy guidelines of 0.2 mg/L for drinking
Decane, decane, 5-methyl, season: 0.437 mg/L water. The water sampled from the
decane, 4-methyl, Aliphatic hydrocarbons: cistern during the rainy season which
decane, 2-methyl, Dry season: 0.011 mg/L, 4.9% of included the first flush water had a
decane, 3-methyl, TOC total organic concentration lower than
decane, 3,8-dimethyl, Rainy season: 0.108 mg/L, 24.7% of the maximum permissible
undecane, dodecane, TOC concentration of 0.5 mg/L set by the
tetradecane, Aromatic compounds: WHO.
1-octadecane, eicosane, Dry season: 0.003 mg/L, 1.4% of
docosane, tetracosane, TOC
heptacosane, Rainy season: 0.017 mg/L, 3.9% of
tritriacontane, TOC
hexatriacontane, Phthalate:
hexacosane, Dry season: 0.203 mg/L, 92.3% of
heptadecane, 9-octyl, TOC
heneicosane, 11-decyl, Rainy season: 0.271 mg/L, 62% of
2,5-cyclohexadiene-1,4- TOC
dione,2,6-bis(1,1- Phosphate esters:
dimethylethyl), Dry season: 0.003 mg/L, 1.4% of
dodecanenitrile, TOC
2-propenoic acid, octyl Rainy season: 0.041 mg/L, 9.4% of
ester, Eicosane, TOC
10-methyl, The following compounds were below
1R-,alpha,-pinene, the detectable limits:
1-Eicosene, 1-decene, 1-octadecane, heptadecane, 9-octyl,
1-hexanol, 2-ethyl, heneicosane, 11-decyl, eicosane,
cedrol, triethylene glycol, 10-methyl, 1r-,alpha,-pinene,
pentaethylene glycol, 1-eicosene, 1-decene, 1-hexanol,
4-methyl-5-nonanone, 2-ethyl, 4-methyl-5-nonanone,
cyclohexanone, cyclohexanemethyl
isopropyl palmitate, cyclopentylcarboxylate,
isopropyl stearate, naphthalene,
cyclohexanemethyl 1,2,3,4,4a,5,6,8a-octahydro,
cyclopentylcarboxylate, 1-naphthalenamine, n-phenyl,
1,2-benzenedicarboxylic 1h-pyrazde,,5-bis(1,1-
acid, bis (2-methylethyl) dimethylethyl)-4-methyl,
ester, ethylbenzene, thiophene, 2,5-dibutyl, phenol,
p-xylene, 1h-3a, 2,6-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-ethyl
7-methanoazulene,
2125
2126
Samples Number of
9. Austin, TX, Rooftop runoff 12 samples from PAH PAH values in mg/Kg were: Yield of PAH was higher in roofs located Van Metre
USA metal roofs and asphalt shingle roofs: 1234 near expressway over those collected and
asphalt shingle metal roofs: 1385. about 100 m away. Little difference in Mahler,
roofs PAH was found in run off coming 2003
from the two roof types.
10. Le Marais, Roofs 11 roofs having four Aliphatic hydrocarbons Concentration medians of total Emission from vehicles along with Moilleron
France different covering aliphatic hydrocarbons ranged atmospheric fallout appears et al.,
materials: from 345 to 827 g/L. The responsible for aliphatic 2002
interlocking clay levels found at the catchment hydrocarbons. Both roof
tiles, flat clay tiles, outlet during dry and wet characteristics and chemical properties
zinc sheets and weather periods were of the of organic pollutants should be taken
slate. same order of magnitude (i.e., into account in order to evaluate the
700 g L1). The particulate level of pollution in roof runoff.
phase represented 85% of the
total aliphatic hydrocarbon
content whatever the sample.
11. Gdansk, Runoff from 7 45 Volatile organohalogen All 7 roofing materials contributed In general, pesticide levels in runoff Polkowska
(Poland) different compounds, petroleum organonitrogen and were higher than in precipitation for et al.,
roof-types hydrocarbons: organophosphorous pesticides; samples collected from roofs covered 2002
organonitrogen, the highest concentration, 5203 with tar paper, galvanized sheet metal
organophosphorus, and ng/L was found in runoff from and asbestos cement corrugated
organochlorine metal tiled roof. sheets, which indicates that the
pesticides. Organochlorines were found in roofing materials contributed to the
Concentrations of these the runoff from all roofs except pollution of runoff waters.
were determined as PTEE, in the concentration Some roofing materials, including tar
well as their toxicity range of 37019970 ng/L. paper, galvanized sheet metal, and
was assayed on the asbestos cement corrugated sheets,
basis of inhibition of seem to be particularly good at
bioluminescent bacteria absorbing selected pesticides (e.g.,
Vibrio fischerii heptachlor epoxide) from dry
deposition or vapors in the
atmosphere.
Toxicity to V. fischerii weakly
correlated with levels of
organonitrogen and
organophosphorus pesticides.
12. Zurich, Runoff from three 14 rain events Pesticides In the runoff from the tile roof The ratios of runoff load to atmospheric Zobrist et al.,
Switzerland types of roofs: pesticide concentrations deposition calculated for each event 2000
inclined tile, reached > 100 g/L in a separately indicated a significant
inclined few events, thereby crossing the retention of trianzines by the gravel
polyester, and WHO guidelines for potability. roof and a small one by the tile roof.
flat gravel. The polyester roof just acted as
conveyor for these compounds
occurring in the rainwater.
13. Zurich, Runoff from 50 Acetate, formate, and Concentration ranges of organic First flush contained the highest Mason et al.,
Switzerland different flat oxalate acids (in M), in the first flush concentrations of these acids that 1999
roofs and after, were: were probably derived from processes
Acetate: 40135 and 820 occurring on the roofs (bacterial
Formate: 3562 and 018 decomposition of organic
Oxalate: 1017 and 310 compounds) since subsequent levels
found matched those in the rain.
14. Switzerland Runoff from roofs Triazines, Pesticide concentrations in single Although in some cases European Union Bucheli
made up of clay acetamides, rain events (ng/L) and total and Swiss drinking water standards et al.,
titles, polyester, phenoxy acids annual loads (ng/m2 year) (100 ng/L) in the runoff waters were 1998a
and flat gravel were: exceeded, for the three compound
atrazine: 903, 13900 classes investigated, the groundwater
alachlor: 191, 5900 contamination potential of the
R. dichlorprop: 106, 5100 pesticides originating from the
atmosphere can be considered of
equal or even smaller importance as
compared to their direct use in
agriculture. The investigations also
showed that leaching of pesticides
used as construction chemicals on
roofs, that is as roof protection agents
in sealings used on flat gravel roofs,
may be a much more significant
source of organic pollutants present in
roof runoff.
15. Zurich, Different flat roofs 50 Herbicides The concentrations (g/L) in the Concentrations of a few micrograms per Bucheli
Switzerland R-mecoprop, runoff had the range: liter at an R to S enantiomeric ratio et al.,
S-mecoprop, R-mecoprop < 0.031.6 (ER) of 0.81.4 can permanently be 1998b
(R,S)-mecoprop etc. S-mecoprop < 0.032.2 expected in roof runoff from flat roofs
(R.S)-mecoprop < 0.033.6 which contain sealing membranes
involving Preventol B2.
The major factors that govern the
release of (R,S)-mecoprop are the type
of bituminous sheets, the biological
activity, and the intensity of the
applied rooftop greening.
2127
et al., 1997; Hoque et al., 2003; Murrell and Stewart, 1983; Nolde, 2007; Sasaki
et al., 1993; Simmons et al., 2008; Weinstein et al., 1993). As may be seen
from a summary of numerous reports presented in Table 3, the presence of
microbial indicators and pathogens has been found to vary greatly, with re-
ported counts up to thousands CFU/100 ml (Simmons et al., 2001; Zhu et al.,
2004). There are several other reports on the prevalence of microbiological
contaminants in roof-collected rainwater (Ahmed et al., 2009; Fujioka and
Chinn, 1987; Fujioka et al., 1991; Gould and Nissen Peterson, 1999; Haeber
and Waller, 1987; Jordan et al., 2008; Lye, 1987, 2002; Waller et al., 1984).
The perception of the suitability of harvested rainwater depends on
whether the alternative is of surer quality or not. In areas where rainwater
harvests are used as alternatives to other untreated or ineffectively treated
water sources, the former is perceived as vastly superior in terms of micro-

biological quality. On the other hand, in most developed countries, rooftop
rainwater harvests are deemed poorer alternatives to the generally very safe
public water supplies.
The probability of a roof being infected by human-specific pathogens
is very low. First, it is very uncommon to use rooftops for defecation and
even the most illiterate would avoid doing it if the roof was to be used to
harvest rainwater. In some rural areas in developing countries defecation
in open lands is practiced and it is possible that fecally contaminated dust
may get blown on to the roofs or the falling rain may capture airborne
pathogens. But, until now, there has been no report linking rooftop rainwater
harvests with the occurrence of major diseases such as cholera, typhoid, and
hepatitis, which are transmitted via human fecal matter. There is a greater
possibility, especially in developing countries, that pathogens present in
livestock droppings may contaminate the roofs.
The most likely agents of microbiological contamination of rooftop rain-
water harvests are microorganisms that come through the droppings of birds,
rodents, reptiles, and insects (Beysens et al., 2006; Koplan et al., 1978; Mer-
ritt et al., 1999). These include some species of Salmonella though S. typhi,
which causes typhoid, isnt likely to be present as it is restricted to human
hosts. Other major threats are Campylobacter, protozoa Giardia and Cryp-
tosporidium, and opportunistic bacteria such as Pseudomonas, Legionella,
Leptospira, and Aeromonas. Koplan et al. (1978) isolated S. arechevalata
from rainwater supply, but not the storage tank at Trinidad. Taylor et al.
(2000) found S. saintpaul in Queensland, Australia, possibly coming via the
feces of mice and frogs. S. typhimurium was isolated from the rooftop har-
vests at New Zealand (Simmons and Smith, 1997). Campylobacter, a bacteria
of the family Spirillaceae, are the most important waterborne pathogens in
high-income countries (Environment Agency, 2002) and among the most im-
portant wordwide (World Health Organization [WHO], 2004). Campylobacter
can survive in moderate warm waters for several days, but can remain alive
for several weeks in colder waters. Not all species are pathogenic; C. enteritis
TABLE 3. A summary of reports on the microbiological quality of rainwater harvested from rooftops
Samples Number of
Number country from analyzed tested Other salient findings Reference
1. Queensland, Roof runoff 84 Giardia lamblia, Of the 84 roof-harvested rainwater samples tested for Ahmed et al., 2009
Australia Salmonella spp., fecal indicators, 57 (65%) and 72 (82%) were found to
E. coli be positive for E. coli and enterococci, respectively.
Traditional fecal indicators E. coli and enterococci do not
appear satisfactory surrogates for the presence of
human enteric pathogens, showing no significant
correlations with any of the pathogens measured.
2. Eastern Rainwater storage 80 Bacterial culture Cultivated isolates were found to comprise members of Evans et al., 2009
Australia systems isolation, bacterial four major bacterial divisions; Proteobacteria,
diversity Firmicutes, Actinobacteria and Bacteroidetes, including
more than 200 species from 80 different genera.
Proteobacteria from alpha, beta, and gamma subclasses
were dominant; a set of core taxa comprising
representative genera from all four phyla could be
identified.
Coliform and other species specifically associated with
fecal material comprised < 15% of the species
identified, and represented < 1.5% of total average
abundance.
The composition of the cultivated populations and scope
of diversity present, suggested that rainwater tanks
may support functional ecosystems comprising
complex communities of environmental bacteria,
which may have beneficial implications for the quality
of harvested rainwater.
3. Jordan Harvested 90 Total coliforms (TC), The average concentrations of TC, FC, and E. coli were Radaideh et al.,
rainwater storage fecal coliform (FC), 6.4, 2.5, and 2.2 MPN/100 ml, respectively. For the 2009
tanks and E. coli. samples collected from the land catchments of storage
tanks, the average concentrations for the parameters
were 24.5, 11.2, and 5.1 MPN/100 ml, respectively. For
samples collected from the land catchments of the
storage tanks, the average concentrations of the same
parameters were 24.5, 11.2, and 5.1 MPN/100 ml,
respectively.
2129
2130
TABLE 3. A summary of reports on the microbiological quality of rainwater harvested from rooftops (Continued)
Samples Number of
Location/ collected samples
Number country from analyzed Parameters tested Other salient findings Reference
4. Limpopo, Harvested Total coliforms (TC), The 1% and the 3.5% sodium hypochlorite solutions Potgieter et al.,
South Africa rainwater storage fecal coliforms (FC), effectively reduced the numbers of indicator 2009
systems Escherichia coli, microorganisms to undetectable counts in both
fecal enterococci, (traditional plastic container and the improved CDC
Clostridium safe water-storage container) types of water-storage
perfringens, containers. However, no statistical differences were
male-specific F-RNA seen between the two types of water-storage
and somatic containers in the numbers of indicator microorganisms
coliphages present in the stored water on the addition of a
placebo sodium hypochlorite solution.
A household questionnaire survey indicated an urgent
need for education concerning the risk of waterborne
diseases, the proper use of safe household
water-storage devices, water treatment processes and
improvement of hygiene and sanitation practices in
these rural households. The 1% as well as the 3.5%
sodium hypochlorite solutions were effective
home-based treatments.
5. Victoria, Rainwater tanks 4 Salmonella, Shigella, Twenty-seven attendees were found to have abdominal Franklin et al., 2009
Australia, Yersinia, pain, diarrhea and nausea (attack rate 49%). Of 11
Campylobacter, fecal specimens tested all were positive for Salmonella
Aeromonas, and typhimurium definitive phage type 9 (DT9).
Plesiomonas spp. Of four samples taken from the untreated private water
supply, two were positive for DT9. Drinking water
from containers filled from rainwater tanks [relative
risk (RR) = 3.2, p = .039] and participation in two
recreational activitiesflying fox (RR = 5.3, p =
0.011), and beam-balance (RR = 3.9, p = .050)were
indicative of a link with illness.
Environmental and epidemiological investigations
suggested rainwater collection tanks contaminated
with DT9 as being the cause of the outbreak.
Increased use of rainwater tanks may heighten the risk
of waterborne disease outbreaks unless appropriate
preventative measures are undertaken.
6. Australia Rainwater storage 27 Escherichia coli, Of the 27 rainwater samples tested, 17 (63%), 21 (78%), Ahmed et al., 2008
tanks enterococci, 13 (48%), and 24 (89%) were positive for E. coli,
Clostridium enterococci, C. perfringens, and Bacteroides spp.,
perfringens, and respectively. Of the 27 samples, 11 (41%), 7 (26%), 4
Bacteroides spp. (15%), 3 (11%), and 1 (4%) were PCR positive for the
Campylobacter coli ceuE gene, the Legionella
pneumophila mip gene, the Aeromonas hydrophila lip
gene, the Salmonella invA gene, and the
Campylobacter jejuni map A gene.
Of the 21 samples tested, 4 (19%) were positive for the
Giardia lamblia giardin gene. The binary logistic
regression model indicated a positive correlation (p <
.02) between the presence/absence of enterococci and
A. hydrophila.
The binary logistic regression model indicated a positive
correlation (p < 0.02) between the presence/absence
of enterococci and A. hydrophila.
7. Tucson, USA Rainwater cisterns 11 E. coli, enterococci 3050% samples were positive for E. coli; 100% samples Jordan et al., 2008
contained enterococci.
All physicochemical and microbiological constituents
analyzed were present at higher numbers in the
summer than in the winter.
8. Auckland, Rainwater storage 201 Legionella Five households (10%) were culture-positive for Simmons et al.,
New tanks pneumophila L. pneumophila serogroup 1 (Lp1). 2008
Zealand Roof-collected rainwater systems in a temperate climate
can provide suitable reservoirs for the survival and
proliferation of Legionella. The maximum hot water
system temperature in the samples positive for
L. pneumophila serogroup 1 (Lp1) was 69 C.
9. Texas, USA surface water 193 Total coliforms, Statistically supportable seasonal variations were found Keeley et al., 2008
samples Escherichia coli, suggesting that Cryptosporidium and Giardia were
Cryptosporidium, higher in summer and fall than in other seasons of the
and Giardia year. While Cryptosporidium levels were correlated
with rainfall, this was not the case with Giardia. The
maximum numbers for both protozoan parasites were
detected from a site impacted by cattle ranching during
calving season.
The occurrence of Cryptosporidium oocysts was higher
in both frequency and concentration than Giardia
cysts; the former were found in 99% and the latter in
87% of the samples. The occurrence of both together
was significantly, but not strongly, correlated.
2131
2132
Samples Number of
10. Bermuda Rainwater storage 102 Total coliform (TC), Approximately 90% of the samples analyzed were Levesque et al.,
tanks Escherichia coli contaminated with total coliforms in concentrations 2008
exceeding 10 CFU/100 mL, and approximately 66% of
samples showed contamination with E. coli.
Tank cleaning is the most efficient means to protect
against water contamination.
11. Eastern Roof-fed rainwater 112 Heterotrophic plate High degree of variance in bacterial counts was found; Simmons et al.,
Australia storage tanks count, E. coli (EC), 82% cold water samples and 100% hot water samples 2008
enterococci (ENT), were suitable for drinking.
total coliforms (TC) In terms of EC counts the quality of tank water was
generally satisfactory, with 64% of cold water samples
and 96% of hot water samples compliant with
Australian Drinking Water Standards as applied to
mains water supplies.
In terms of bathing quality, 98% of cold water samples
returned an EC count below 150/100 mL, and 78% and
ENT count below 35/100 mL; these being the threshold
median counts for compliance with recreational water
quality guidelines. Hot water samples were 100%
compliant for both parameters.
12. Delhi, India Roof runoff 54 Total coliform (TC), Correlation between MPN and H2 S tests was 6575%. The Vasudevan and
fecal coliform (FC), correlation was better at high bacterial counts. Tandon, 2008
fecal streptococci Only 30% of rainwater samples met WHO standards of
(FS) 1 FC per 100 ml. On relaxing the standard to FC < 10
per 100 ml, acceptable samples by MPN went up to
55%. Rainwater quality improved with first flush
elimination and also exposure to sunlight for two
consecutive days.
13. Berlin, Roof runoff 41 Colony forming units, Most of the samples exceeded the limits for Berlin water Nolde, 2007
Germany E. coli, total quality requirements in terms of these parameters but
coliforms, treatment including disinfection by ultraviolet radiation
enterococci, made the water quality acceptable.
Pseudomons
aeruginosa
14. Kefalonia Ferroconcrete 300 Enterococci, E. coli, In 80.3% of the rainwater samples, total coliforms were Sazakli et al., 2007
Island, storage tanks Pseudomonas detected, while E. coli and Enterococci were found in
Greece adjacent to aeruginosa, 40.9% and 28.8% of the sample, respectively. The
cement paved Clostridium corresponding percentages for the mixed or ground water
catchment areas perfringens samples did not differ, at a statistically significant level
(p > .05) with values of 72.7%, 40.9%, and 43.2%,
respectively.
In 25% of the rainwater samples all the three indicators were
detected, while the corresponding percentage for the
mixed or ground water samples was 39%. Pseudomonas
aeruginosa and Clostridium perfringens were not detected
in any sample, either rainwater or mixed.
Differences in a statistically significant level (p < .05) were
detected in total viable count at 22 C and 37 C between
rainwater and mixed or groundwater samples with the
higher values being detected for the latter water type. The
main microbiological indicators, total coliforms, E. coli and
Enterococci also showed seasonal variation.
The highest ratio of positive samples was detected in
autumn while in winter it was decreased at a statistically
significant level (p < .05) and was gradually increased in
spring and summer.
15. Australia Roof runoff 11 rainfall events Heterotrophic plate On average, fecal coliforms represented a very minor portion Evans et al., 2007
count (HPC), (0.1%) of the total bacterial load. Regression analysis
Coliforms, revealed HPC and Pseudomonas counts to be correlated
Pseudomonas with one another; however, no correlations was observed
between coliforms and either HPC or Pseudomonas.
These findings together indicate that fecal contamination of
the roof catchment was minimal, and that throughout the
sampling period, coliform numbers were under influences
independent of those responsible for the bulk of the
overall bacterial load. While fecal coliforms are enteric
organisms and therefore virtually exclusively fecal origin,
the total coliform count may comprise environmental
organisms not necessarily common to the digestive tracts
of vertebrate animals.
It follows that atmospherically deposited microorganisms
may represent a large proportion of the microbial load of
roof harvested rainwater. Consequently, the microbial
composition may be significantly influenced by weather
patterns in relation to wind speed and direction, which
may have future practical use in predicting water quality
at specific locations.
2133
Samples Number of
2134
16. Victoria and Rainwater storage 49 Coliforms, fecal Results were outside the Australian Drinking Water Guideline Spinks et al., 2006
South tanks streptococci (ADWG) values for microbiological indicator organisms.
Australia
17. South Australia Consumers of 9543 children Occurrence of Consumption of tank rainwater did not increase the risk of Heyworth et al.,
mains water and gastroenteritis associated gastroenteritis relative to public mains water consumption 2006
consumers of with Salmonella, among four to six-year-old children in South Australia.
tank rainwater Shigella, Staphylococcus, The incidence of gastroenteritis among children was high
Campylobacter jejuni, compared with that previously reported, but much of this was
Clostridium, E. coli, mild gastroenteritis lasting just one day.
Yersinia
18. Sao Paulo, Roof runoff and 60 Total coliforms, fecal Total coliforms and Clostridium were found in 89% and 91% of May and Prado,
Brazil. storage tank coliforms, the samples, respectively. 2006
Clostridium, Enterococci, Enterococci were found in more than 98% of the samples but
and Pseudomonas P. aeruginosa was found in only 17% of the samples.
aeruginosa The samples collected from the accumulation tank showed
better results than the ones collected directly from the
rainwater collector.
19. Bordeaux, Rainwater 396 Colony forming units The biological analysis of dew and rain showed that the WHO Beysens et al., 2006
France (CFU) and European Community directive limits for bacteria

developing at 22 C (100 CFU) and 36 C (10 CFU) were
exceeded. Although close to being potable, water from these
sources would need disinfection. The origin of the bacteria is
likely in human manipulation, contact with animals (small
mammals), birds, and insects (flies, ants) that can drink dew
water and easily contaminate it.
20. Goyang-Si, Runoff from 5 Total viable bacteria count TC were about 1200 MPN per 100 ml, suggesting that the stored Kim et al., 2005
Korea unvegetated and (TVBC), water is safe for toilet flushing. The averages for E. coli and
garden roofs Total coliform (TC), TVBC were 4.2 MPN per 100 ml and 330 MPN per 100 ml,
Escherichia coli respectively.
The runoffs from road and roof garden contained substantial
amounts of contaminants such as particles, ions, organics, and
nutrients compared to wet deposition, suggesting that they
should be properly treated prior to discharge to water bodies.
These pollutants appear to transfer into rainwater storage
tank, leading to a deterioration of stored water quality.
Additional treatments such as disinfection and filtration would
be required to reduce mainly microbial and particulate
pollutants to allow the use of rainwater as grey water in
buildings.
21. Ile-Ife, Nigeria Roof 6 Total heterotrophic P. aeruginosa and pneumoniae occurred in Adeniyi and
bacteria, all the rain sample types with an overall occurrence Olabanji, 2005
Pseudomonas frequency of 100% and 78%
aeruginosa, in the individual samples, respectively.
Klebsiella The other species were each characterized by an
pneumonia, occurrence frequency of less than 20% and were
Pseudomonas restricted in distribution either with regard to rain
fluorescens, sample type or the period of the rainy season. For
Actinomyces bovis, instance, P. fluorescens was recorded only in
Pseudomonas ironzinc-intercepted samples, while P. povonacea and
pseudomallei, K. edwardsii occurred only in thatch rain samples.
Klebsiella edwardsii, Similarly, A. bovis occurred only in free-fall rain, while
Proteus morganella, P. morganella occurred only in slate-intercepted rain
Pseudomonas samples. Five of the nine recorded isolates, viz P.
pseudomallei fluorescens, P. povonacea, K. edwardsii,
P. morganella and A. bovis, were recorded only from
roof-intercepted samples, while P. pseudomallei was
the only isolate restricted to free-fall rain samples.
Thus, only three isolates namely, P. pseudomallei, P.
aeruginosa and K. pneumoniae, occurred commonly
in all the six rain sample types considered.
22. Korea Runoff from roof, 5 Total viable bacterial The rainwater samples did not satisfy the grey water Ree-Ho et al., 2005
and roof garden; count (TVBC), total standards for microbial pollutants (TVBC and TC).
storage tank coliform (TC)
23. Loess Plateau, Roof runoff Fecal coliform (FC) FC exceeded the limits of drinking water in all the Zhu, et al., 2004
China catchment systems.
24. Jordan Rainwater storage 368 E. coli and 17% of samples tested positive for E. coli and 2% for C. Abo-Shehada et al.,
reservoirs Cryptosporidium Paryum, Only 1% of the reservoirs had E. coli, while 2004
parvum concrete reservoirs were free. No C. Parvum oocysts
were detected in either the concrete or metal
reservoirs. Risk factor for contamination with C.
Parvum was enhanced in reservoirs opening at floor
level and buckets kept outside the reservoir. All in all,
rainwater stored in cisterns represents a health hazard
if used without treatment.
25. Lusaka, Rainwater 2 Total coliform, fecal The stored water failed to meet the requirements of WHO Handia et al., 2003
Zambia harvested into coliform guidelines for drinking water in terms of
concrete and bacteriological quality but it can be used for drinking
brick tanks after it has been boiled
26. New Zealand Harvested 167 children Giardia sp. Children using rooftop-harvested rainwater were at a Hoque et al., 2003
rainwater greater risk of suffering giardiasis than a reference
group which consumed elaborately treated water.
2135
2136
Samples Number of
27. Rural areas of Water faucet 125 Heterotrophic plate count, 56% samples exceeded the limits for microbiological Simmons et al.,
Auckland, total coliforms, fecal contamination as per New Zealand Drinking Water Standards. 2001
New coliforms, enterococci, Aeromonas were found in 16% samples, Salmonella in one
Zealand Salmonella, sample, and Cryptosporidium in two samples.
Cryptosporidium,
Legionella,
Campylobacter,
Aeromonas, Giardia
28. South Australia Rain water storage 100 Heterotrophic plate count 59% samples were contaminated with TC, 84% with FS. High Plazinska, 2001
tanks (HPC), fecal streptococci HPC were recorded.
(FS), total coliforms (TC),
E. coli
29. Palestine Roof catchments Total coliforms (TC), fecal All samples were contaminated with TC and FC. There was Ghanayem, 2001
and water coliforms (FC) lesser bacterial contamination in runoffs from metal roofs.
storage tanks
30. Kerala, India Rainwater storage 30 Fecal coliforms (FC) 93% samples were contaminated with FC. Pushpangadan and
tanks Sivanandan,
2001
31. New Delhi, Roof runoff 54 Fecal coliforms, total All indicator bacteria were present. Rough surfaces carried more Vasudevan et al.,
India coliforms, heterotrophic contaminants. Only 13% of the samples measured up to 2001
plate count, fecal WHO standards for all the indicator bacteria and 2530% met
streptococci the relaxed standards.
32. Port Harcourt, Roof catchments Heterotrophic plate count HPC and Pseudomonas were positive in all samples except one Uba and Aghogho,
Nigeria (HPC), Pseudomonas, sample from the zinc roof. The HPC values as well as the 2000
Salmonella, Shigella, count of pathogenic bacteria like Salmonella were high.
Vibrio
33. Queensland, Rainwater storage 23 Campylobacter enteritis. Untreated rainwater contaminated by the feces of wild animals Merritt et al., 1999
Australia tanks Campylobacter jejuni appears to have been the source of infection in an outbreak
of Campylobacter enteritis.
34. Thailand Roof catchments 709 Fecal coliforms (FC), fecal 76% samples violated the WHO standards for FC and FS. Appan, 1997
and point of streptococci (FS)
consumption
35. Virgin Islands, Rainwater storage 44 Giardia, 45% samples were positive for Giardia and 23% for Crabtree et al., 1996
USA systems Cryptosporidium, Cryptosporidium.
heterotrophic Nonmammalian oocysts were found frequently in cistern
bacteria (HC), waters. Their levels ranged from 1 to 10 organisms/100
total coliform(TC) ml with one sample at 70 oocysts. These levels are
associated with estimated daily risks of 102 to 104 and
are well above the levels prescribed as safe for
drinking water in the United States.
On occasions high levels of HC (9.9 105 CFU/ml) and
TC (> 2000 CFU/100 ml) were also detected in these
waters.
36. Malaysia Roof 48 Fecal coliform (FC) FC counts increased in the second liter from galvanized Yaziz, et al., 1989
and total coliform iron roof but fell sharply in the third liter. FC was not
(TC) detected in the fourth- and fifth-liter samples.
Similarly, the TC counts increased and then decreased in
the last two liters of water harvested from tiled roof but
their numbers were markedly higher and were
detected in all samples.
37. Micronesia Roof catchments 203 Total coliform (TC) Fifty-seven percent of the rainwater catchment systems Dillaha and Zolan,
with faucets and fecal coliform had no FC and 61% had fewer than 10 TC per 100 ml. 1985
(FC) Catchment characteristics were found to have a
statistically significant effect on TC levels but they did
not affect FC concentrations.
Rainwater catchment systems were found to provide
acceptable water in most cases but disinfection prior to
consumption appeared advisable.
38. Trinidad, West Rooftop harvest Salmonella arechevala Water samples from two kitchen taps fed by the Koplan, 1978
Indies roof-collected rainwater were positive for S.
arechevalata on two occasions.
The surface of the roof, used as water catchment, was
covered with bird feces. It was postulated that
rainwater, falling on the roof, washed off animal
excrement, which contained S. arechevalata and led to
the outbreak of salmonellosis.
2137
and C. jejuni are the most important pathogenic strains but C. coli, C. laridis,
and C. fetus have also been associated with disease.
Giardia and Cryptosporidium are among parasitic protozoans that cause
disease in humans and animals (Ahmed et al., 2009; Keeley and Faulkner,
2008). Their cysts or oocysts are hardy and can survive for weeks to months
in fresh water (WHO, 2004). On ingestion by a human, a cyst hatches and
infects the host. Cysts and oocysts are also extremely resistant to disinfec-
tants such as chlorine and UV irradiation. They are, however, susceptible
to desiccation (Robertson et al., 1992) and are therefore unlikely to survive
on a roof for a long period. Being a dormant stage, cysts and oocysts are
also nonmotile and settle out in a quiescent environment such as a water
tank. Giardia and Cryptosporidium have been found together in rainwater
supplies by Albrechtsen (2002), Crabtree et al. (1996), and Simmons et al.

(2001). In their study on the possible presence of Cryptosporidium oocysts
and Giardia cysts in cistern water in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Crabtree et al.
(1996) found one or both of the protozoa in 81% of the public cisterns; Cryp-
tosporidium was found more often in the 44 samples than Giardia. These
levels correspond to estimated daily risks of 102104 and are well above
acceptable levels as described for safe drinking. Coliforms (>2000 CFU/100
ml) were also detected in these waters. In other words, Cryptosporidium and
Giardia, as well as bacteria, were present in these waters at levels that may
involve significant public health risks.
Legionella is a genus of bacteria of which there are about 40 species,
about 18 of which cause disease in humans (Environment Agency, 2002;
Simmons et al., 2008). They are motile and aerobic (Sussman, 2002) and
can survive in waters of widely varying characteristics but require warm
temperatures to multiply (>25 C but <45 C). Stored rainwater is within this
range in hot countries (Ariyananda, 2005; Gumbs and Dierberg, 1985), so
it is likely that many tanks in these countries contain Legionella species.
Legionalla have also been shown to live within protazoa and can be resistant
to many of the water treatment steps in this manner. The dose of Legionella
necessary to cause infection by ingestion is rather high (105106 cells/ml)
(Broadhead, et al., 1988), but when present in aerosols even a single cell
has the potential to cause infection (WHO, 1996). Water used in showers or
flushing carries a potential hazard of Legionella infection, though drinking
is largely safe (Martinson, 2007). Several studies have isolated Legionella
species in roofwater supplies (Broadhead et al., 1988; Ruskin et al., 1992;
Simmons et al., 2008).
Other opportunistic bacteria capable of causing gastroenteritis and other
diseases have also been reported in harvested rainwater: Leptospira (Sasaki
et al., 1993), Aeromonas (Albrechtsen, 2002; Rinehart et al., 1983; Simmons
et al., 2001; Wirojanagud, 1991), Mycobacterium (Albrechtsen, 2002; Tuffley
and Holbeche, 1980), and Psendomonas (Albrechtsen, 2002; Coombes et al.,
2005; Hollander et al., 1996; Krishna, 1989; Rinehart et al., 1983), among
others (Table 3).
Particulates
Harvested rainwater may carry substantial concentration of particulate matter.
Besides making the water cloudy and, hence, reducing its aesthetic appeal,
particulates can also harm the water quality in other ways. They can carry
microorganisms and organic material with it. High levels of turbidity can
protect microorganisms from light-based disinfection such as UV lamps or
SODIS and can absorb chlorine. Particulates may contain heavy metals, es-
pecially in urban areas. Roof runoff can have very high turbidity, especially
the initial runoff (Yaziz et al., 1989), but storage in the tank can reduce it
significantly. Indeed, at the tank outlet rainwater harvesting systems normally
produce water with turbidity within the WHO guidelines (Ariyananda, 2005;
Bannister et al., 1997; Handia, 2005a, 2005b; Simmons et al., 2001). The main
reason for this is that the storage tank forms a quiescent settling chamber
and most particulates settle out within 24 hr. The resultant sludge itself has
also been linked to cleaning processes within the tank (Lucke, 1998; Spinks
et al., 2005). Organic material is less dense than water and initially floats to
the top (Deltau, 2001), but eventually saturates with water and settles (Spinks
et al., 2003).
If the roof is made up, in part or in full, of asbestos, and if asbestos
gutters are used, rainwater harvest may carry with it some asbestos dust.
But whereas it is dangerous to breathe in asbestos dust, for example while
cutting asbestos materials, there is no known danger from drinking water
containing asbestos fibers (WHO, 2004). Asbestos is strongly associated with
lung cancer, not with stomach cancer. Asbestos pipes continue to be used
in many countries for drinking water distribution with no ill effects.
Region-Specific Impacts
Studies on the effect of power station emissions on rain quality (Ayres, 1995;
Marquardt et al., 2001) and the influence of Sahara dust on rain acidity (Loye-
Pilot et al., 1986) illustrated the contributions from anthropogenic and natural
sources to rain chemistry. Galpin and Turner (1999) found South African rain-
water chemistry to be influenced by a combination of industrial, terrestrial,
biomass, and marine sources. Statistical techniques have been used to in-
terpret rain chemistry data in various parts of the world (Bridgman, 1990;
Crawley and Sievering, 1986; Ezcurra et al., 1988; Galpin and Turner, 1999;
Khwaja and Husain, 1990). Trajectory analysis and regional-scale transport
modeling have also been used in various parts of the world to relate ob-
served air pollutants and their deposition to likely source areas over large
spatial scales (e.g., Sturman et al., 1997; Tyson and DAbreton, 1998; Zunckel
et al., 2000).
Numerous other studies (Bridgman, 1992; Bucheli et al., 1998a; Bucheli
et al., 1998b; Forster, 1998, 1999; Garnaud et al., 1999; Loye-Pilot and Morelli,
1988; Willey et al., 1988; Zhong et al., 2001) have also demonstrated rela-
tionships between concentrations of chemical contaminants and proximity to
contaminant sources (emissions), weather patterns, and atmospheric trans-
port and deposition. Aerobiological studies, reviewed by Lighthart (2000)
and Jones and Harrison (2004), have repeatedly demonstrated the effect of
seasonal and meteorological influences on atmospheric concentrations of
bacteria and fungal spores. These have been correlated for certain species,
with the incidence of allergic and infectious outbreaks (Brouqui et al., 2004;
Corden and Millington, 2001; Hawker et al., 1998; Tissot-Dupont et al., 2004).
The myriad ways in which the situations existing in close proximity
of the harvest area as well as far-off happenings can influence the quality
of rooftop harvest is illustrated in the study by Zunckel et al. (2003). The
authors explored the chemical composition of rainfall in northeast Uruguay
and the factors that influenced it over a 2-year span. They found that ter-
rigenous sources (e.g., rock, soil, dust) as well as agricultural sources (e.g.,
livestock and crop fertilization) contribute to rainwater chemistry on a local
and subregional scale. An influx of marine air from the Atlantic Ocean had
a regional-scale influence, whereas biomass burning contributed at the local
and subregional scales (e.g., wood fuel, agro industries) and through long-
range transport (e.g., forest fires, land clearing). The authors inferred that
large-scale biomass burning in the central parts of the continent influenced
rainwater chemistry on a scale far larger than had been estimated earlier.
Similarly, but to a lesser extent, the influx of marine air off the Atlantic
Ocean had a greater regional-scale influence than has been suggested.
In the same study (Zunckel et al., 2003), correlations between chloride,
sodium, and magnesium suggested a contribution from a marine source to
the Uruguayan rainwater chemistry. In turn, a correlation between nitrate and
ammonium was attributed mainly to livestock and fertilizer use. Correlations
between fluoride and organic acids suggested a contribution from activities
such as biomass burning, the use of wood fuel, agro industries, and crop
fertilizer. A correlation between calcium and magnesium was assumed to
imply a contribution from crustal sources such as unpaved roads, windblown
dust from bare soils and plowing. Trajectories from active fires in the central
parts of South America passed over northeast Uruguay and corresponded
with peaks in pyrogenic indicators in the observed rainfall.
Most recent studies, performed with state-of-the-art analytical tools, have
reinforced previous findings on the presence of pollutants in rooftop har-
vests as a function of regional and seasonal influences. For example, in a
study by Sazakli et al. (2007), the quality of harvested rainwater used for
domestic and drinking purposes in the northern area of Kefalonia Island
in southwest Greece and the factors affecting it were extensively investi-

gated through a 3-year surveillance. In 12 seasonal samplings, 156 rainwater
and 144 ground- or mixed-water samples were collected from ferroconcrete
storage tanks (3001000 m3 capacity), which are adjacent to cement-paved
catchment areas (6003000 m2). Common anions and major cations as well
as the metals Fe, Mn, Cd, Pb, Cu, Cr, Ni, and Zn were tested. The presence
of three major groups of organic compounds, PAHs, organochloride pesti-
cides (OCPs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) was also screened by
appropriate analytical techniques. Total coliforms, Escherichia coli, and ente-
rococci were detected in 80.3%, 40.9%, and 28.8% of the rainwater samples,
respectively, although they were found in low concentrations. Chemical and
microbiological parameters showed seasonal fluctuations. Principal compo-
nent analysis revealed that microbiological parameters were affected mainly

by the cleanness level of catchment areas, whereas chemical parameters
were influenced by the proximity of the sea and human activities.
The main microbiological indicatorstotal coliforms, E. coli, and
enterococcialso showed seasonal variation (Sazakli et al., 2007). The high-
est ratio of positive samples was detected in autumn, whereas in winter it
was decreased to a statistically significant level and then gradually increased
in spring and summer.
Harvest Quality as a Function of Time

Expectedly, the quality of the harvest is at its poorest at the start of a rainfall
event (Zobrist et al., 2000). A study by Yaziz et al. (1989) on the quality of
rainwater from a tile and a galvanized-iron type roof catchment had shown
that the concentrations of various pollutants were high in the first liter but
decreased in subsequent samples with few exceptions. Fecal coliform and
total coliform counts ranged from 8 to 13 (tile roof) and from 4 to 8 (iron
roof) to from 41 to 75 (tile roof) and from 25 to 63 (iron roof) colonies per
100 ml, respectively, However, no fecal coliforms were detected in the fourth-
and fifth-liter samples from both roofs. The pH of the harvest was also less
acidic than that of the parent rainwater. The average zinc concentrations in
the runoff from the galvanized-iron roof was about fivefold higher compared
with the tile roof, indicating leaching action. Lead concentrations remained
consistently high in all samples collected and exceeded the WHO guidelines
by a factor of 3.5.
The Third-World Scenario

Even though rooftop RWHindeed all forms of RWHis more and more
widely practiced in the third world, little attention has been paid in this
region on the monitoring and management of the harvests quality. Studies
by Pushpangadan and Sivanandan (2001), Pushpangadan et al. (2001), and
Vasudevan et al. (2001) on the rooftop harvests in India support the findings
of other workers across the world that rooftop harvests do not often meet
the microbiological drinking water standards. Varghese and Jaya (2008) as-
sessed the physicochemical and bacteriological quality of rainwater stored in
the ferrocement tanks of Alappuzha District, Kerala. Representative samples
of harvested and stored rain water were collected by them on random basis
from 10 stations and analyzed. Whereas the physicochemical characteristics
of the stored rainwater were found to be within the permissible drinking
water standards of the WHO, the microbiological count violated the stan-
dards. Fecal coliforms were also detected in eight of the stored rainwater
samples. Studies conducted in Zambia (Handia, 2005a, 2005b), Ghana (Shier
et al., 1996), Thailand (Wirojanagud, 1987), and elsewhere in the third world
countries (Meera and Ahammed, 2006) present a similar picture.

It must, however, be emphasized that not only the physicochemical
quality but also microbiological quality of harvested rainwater in developing
countries is generally better than that of dug wells and other public water
supply sources. In other words, even as the quality of harvested rainwaters
in these regions may be less than ideal, it is nevertheless better compared
with most other sources of drinking water. A similar conclusion was reached
in a study in northeast Thailand by Pinfold et al. (1993).
Other surveys by Ariyananda and Mawatha (1999), Pushpangadan et al.
(2001), and Handia (2005a, 2005b) in Sri Lanka, India, and Zambia, respec-
tively, also revealed that microbial quality of stored rainwater is often better
than that of other sources of drinking water such as shallow groundwater.
Suitable interventions can further improve the quality of harvested rainwater
in many situations (Ariyananda, 2005; Varghese and Jaya, 2008). Sarkar and
Abbasi (2006) developed a software QUALIDEX with which indices to com-
pare the overall quality of a rainwater harvest with other sources of water
can be generated. QUALIDEX also serves as a virtual water quality meter.
It may be useful to develop indices to quantify the risk posed by different
contaminants in roof runoff, on the lines of reported risk assessment indices
(Khan and Abbasi, 1997c, 1998a, 1998b).
Important Caveats
There are two sets of opinions, mutually conflicting, on the reliability of the
analytical methods used to assess the microbiological quality of rooftop har-
vests. According to one set, exemplified by studies of Simmons et al. (2001)
and Lye (2002), the rooftop harvests may be contaminated with a variety of
opportunistic and pathogenic microorganisms even when the tests based on
traditional indicator organisms such as E. coli may indicate no contamination.
The other set of opinion is represented by Coombes et al. (2006). According
to them, the use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) processes to determine
the DNA of bacteria found in rainwater has put a question mark on the
efficacy of the use of traditional coliform indicator organisms from a differ-

ent perspective. Preliminary experiments have shown that bacteria other than
fecal coliforms, total coliforms, and E. coli, which may not be pathogenic,
can grow on commercially approved media. This indicates that the use of
approved coliform indicator tests can give false positive results, thereby cre-
ating an impression that a rainwater supply is unsafe even when the opposite
may be the case. In summary, the methods based on indicator organisms are
equivocalcapable of giving false positives as well as false negatives.
CONTROL AND TREATMENT OF CONTAMINANTS

IN ROOFTOP HARVESTS
Prestorage Control of Water Quality

Based on the case studies it can be summarized that the factors that influence
the quality of roof runoff are the following:
1. Roof geometry: size, inclination, exposure;

2. Roof material: chemical characteristics, roughness, surface coating, age,
weatherability;
3. Rainfall event: intensity, wind speed, pollutant concentration;
4. Other meteorological factors: seasons, weather characteristics, antecedent
dry period;
5. Chemical properties of the substance contributed by the roof runoff: po-
larity, vapor pressure, water solubility, Henrys constant;
6. Concentration of each substance in the atmosphere: emission, transport,
half-life, phase distribution;
7. Location of the roof: proximity to pollution sources; and
8. Maintenance history of the roof.
In the following sections we discuss the devices that can be used to

control the runoff quality (Martinson, 2007; Martinson and Thomas, 2003;
Rott and Meyer, 2001; Thomas and Martinson, 2007):
Screens and Filters

The aim of these devices is to block off as much debris from entering the
storage tank as possible. The vast majority of contaminates are stuck to the
debris from the roof, so removing the debris also controls the contaminant.
Removing debris also reduces the level of nutrients reaching the tank and
thereby impedes mosquito larvae development and long-term survival of
bacteria (Krampitz and Hollander, 1999; Mittal et al., 2001). The screens and
filters can be set anywhere along the path of the rooftop runoff from the
point the runoff enters the drainage pipe to just before the storage tank. The
devices can include coarse leaf screen and finer filters.
In the design of the inlet filters, two capabilities are to be maximized:

(a) hydraulic efficiency, which is reflected in the ratio of the volume of water
that penetrates versus the volume that is spilled, and (b) particle removal
efficiency, which is reflected in the fraction of incoming particulates that is
blocked off by the filter.
Other factors being equal, greater the mesh size of a filter, the higher its
hydraulic efficiency and the lesser its particle removed efficiency. Therefore,
the two most important characteristics of a filter are mutually antagonistic.
Moreover, the filter in a rainfall harvesting system should be able to deal
with high flows associated with high-intensity rainfall as effectively as mild
flows that come with light drizzles. The state of the art has been reviewed
by Thomas and Martinson (2007), who indicated that a great deal of R&D
is needed to reconcile the conflicting requirements and maximize the filter

performances.
Other important considerations before the filter designers are the fol-
lowing:
The filter should be easy to clean or largely self-cleaning;

It should not block easily (if at all), and blockages should be obvious and
easy to rectify;
It should not provide an entrance for additional contamination;
The total cost should not be out of proportion with the rest of the system
(510% of the tank cost should be considered a maximum in all but the
most fastidious of households).
Coarse Leaf Screen

Leaves and other coarse debris are removed by the coarse leaf screen
(Gajalakshmi and Abbasi, 2004). It need not be especially fine so it is able
to maintain high hydraulic efficiency. Moreover, the screen itself should be
removable for cleaning. It can be installed anywhere in the path of roof
runoffin the gutter, at the beginning of or in the downpipe, in the ground
before the storage tank, or at the tank entrance. Each location has its advan-
tages and disadvantages. For example, installation of the screen in the gutter
would prevent leaf buildup there and reduce mosquito breeding and fire
hazard. However, it can be expensive due to the large areas to be covered.
Installation at downpipe minimizes filter area and the filter can be, to some
extent, self-cleaning. But the maintenance of the filter is difficult. If installed
at the tank entrance, the filter would be visible and easy to clean. Even a
filter of simple and inexpensive devices would suffice. But a filter at that
point would provide space for contaminants, including small organisms, to
enter the tank. Moreover, there will be little provision remaining for finer
filtration.
All things considered, the best location for installing a coarse leaf screen
is in the gutter, and finer screens should be installed downstream.
Fine Filter
Most fine filters used in developing countries are based on sand or gravel.
In developed countries, self-cleaning filters are available with a fine mesh
screen (typically 0.4 mm). These screens use the first flow of water from
a storm to flush off the debris from the filter, or have a continual washing
action using about 10% of the water. In smaller, low-cost roof water systems
there is usually significantly more water available from the roof than the
tank can contain, so self-washing filters can be viable using cloth as a filter
(Martinson and Thomas, 2003).
The biggest challenge associated with the adaptation of fine filters for
rooftop RWH systems is due to very high flows that occur in the course of
downpourson the order of 1.52 l s1causing the filters to overtop.
According to Martinson and Thomas (2005), a low-cost filter can be
made using principles similar to the German self-cleaning designs. A cloth
is stretched over a cone-shaped frame (Figure 2), which allows a proportion
of the water to run off, cleaning the filter. A muslin cloth-based filter can
remove up to 90% of the fine sand and spill about 10% of the inlet water
at a flow rate of 1 L/s, a hydraulic performance roughly comparable to the
commercial filter.
Colwell et al. (2003) have shown that pouring water through the Indian
sari cloth can reduce bacterial load and that the effect is particularly high in
old cotton sari cloth as a result of the threads having frayed, reducing the
aperture size. Coarse cloth is therefore an ideal candidate for water filter use
and self-cleaning cloth filters of these types may be viable if suitable cloth is
available locally.
FIGURE 2. Low-cost, self-cleaning inlet filter mounted on an inlet pipe.

First Flush
As has been brought out by the studies of Yaziz et al. (1989) and others,
described in the preceding sections, contaminants from a roof are usually
concentrated in the first runoff from the roof. After this runoff has passed
and washed the roof in the process, the water is considerably safer so an
effective second line of defense after the fine filtering is to remove the first
part of the rainfall by flushing it off.
Most substances follow this first-flush phenomenontheir concentra-
tions are the highest in the first minutes of a rain event, and decrease later
toward a constant value (Martinson and Thomas, 2005). It is applicable to par-
ticulates as well as dissolved substances, organic as well as inorganic chem-
icals, and animate as well as inanimate constituents (Martinson, 2007). Gen-

erally the first flush effects correspond to the first 2 mm of runoff height and
are caused by one or a combination of the following three processes (Zinder
et al., 1998): (a) matter deposited on the roof during the preceding dry pe-
riod (the dry deposition) is washed off by the falling rain, (b) weathering and
corrosion products of roof cover are washed off, (c) concentrations in the
falling rain (wet deposition) itself decreases with increase in rainfall depth
due to scavenging of particles, aerosols, and gases by rain droplets.
The amount of water to divert in the first flush depends on the dry days
preceding the rainfall, the amount and type of debris, the season and the
quality of the roof surface. Some sources suggest that a minimum of 40 L
of water for every 8090 m2 of the roof surface be diverted away from the
collection tank; this is equivalent to the water in about 0.4 mm of rainfall
falling in that area (Coombes et al., 2000; Texas Water Development Board,
2005). But, during any rain coming after several dry days it is safer to divert
200 L of water per 100 m2 of collection surface, corresponding to the first 2
mm of rainfall. This suggestion is based on the study of Zinder et al, (1998),
as previously noted. In fact it is advisable to flush off all water from the entire
first storm of the new wet season as the roof will be very dirty after the long
dry season. Thereafter, bypassing the first half millimeter of rainfall (or 50 L
of water per 100 m2 of roof area) of each precipitation spell is usually
sufficient. The water bypassed from the collection tank as the first flush
need not go to waste, and can be used for irrigation and other noncontact
purposes.
Martinson and Thomas (2003; 2005; 2007) have extensively reviewed
the flush phenomena and the attempts made thus far to model it. Most such
attempts have been based on the models developed earlier to quantify the
water quality of storm water runoff (from urban roofs, roads, and other parts
of the urban catchment) as a function of time. In the backdrop of these efforts
and based on experiments done at Uganda and Sri Lanka, Martinson (2007)
and Martinson and Thomas (2003, 2005) suggested the following protocol
for determining the first flush amounts:
TABLE 4. Recommended first-flush amounts (in millimeters of rainfall) (Martinson, 2007;

Martinson and Thomas, 2005)
Target turbidity (NTU)

Mean runoff turbidity (NTU) 50 20 10 5
50 0 1.5 2.5 3.5

100 1 2.5 3.5 4.5
200 2 3.5 4.5 5.5
500 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5
1000 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5
2000 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5
1. Measure mean runoff turbidity on wet days following at least 3 dry days.
2. Select a target maximum turbidity at which water may be allowed to enter
the main tank: usually 20 NTU.
3. Employ Table 4 to decide how many millimeters to divert.
4. Divert that amount of water whenever rainfall follows at least 3 dry days.
There are several ways by which the first flush can be diverted away from
the storage tank. The simplest of these is to move the downpipe away from
the storage tank at the start of each rainfall event and let the first flush
bleed off. Another method is to have an extra pipe before the tank inlet and
to provide valves on both pipes (i.e., the extra pipe before the inlet and
on the pipe leading to the tank). The extra pipe valve may be opened
and the tank inlet pipe valve may be closed until the first flush of water is
discharged. After that, the inlet valve to the tank is opened and the extra
pipe valve is closed, to divert the cleaner rainwater into the tank (Figure 3).
Valve 2
Valve 2
Rainwater Rainwater
To tank
from roof from roof
Valve 1 Valve 1
First flush water

A B
FIGURE 3. Manual arrangement for first flush. (A) Valve 1 is kept open and valve 2 is kept
closed to divert the first flush. (B) After sufficient amount of the first flush is diverted, valve
1 is closed and valve 2 is opened to divert the rainwater into the storage tank (Color figure
available online).
Rainwater To tank
from roof
Once the flush chamber is full,
further incoming water flows
into the storage tank
Removable end
with drain hole
FIGURE 4. Automatic first flush arrangement (Color figure available online).

However, it is manual, necessitating the presence of a person capable of

doing it in the house wherever it rains. It is also imprecise and rather crude.
A simple automatic method is to add an extra downpipe before the tank
inlet. The length and the diameter of the pipe should be such that it can
hold the volume of water intended to be flushed off. The bottom end of
this pipe should be closed, with only a small hole to let the water drain
off in a thin trickle. The idea is that the first flush downpipe should empty
itself slowly so that on one hand it shouldnt empty too soon to capture
(hence waste) utilizable water and, on the other hand, be ready by the time
a rainfall event occurs after a few days gap. The position of the hole should
be slightly above the bottom (Figure 4) to prevent its blocking by the settled
particulates. A more sophisticated yet still simple method is to use a float as
depicted in Figure 5.
FIGURE 5. A more sophisticated yet simple first flush arrangement. (A) The first flush water
starts filling the pipe and the float rises with the level of water in the pipe. (B) Once the flush
chamber is full, the float seals off flow into the diverter pipe and further incoming water flows
into the storage tank (Color figure available online).
Rainwater from roof
Downpipe
Break ring
FIGURE 6. Ideal inlet arrangement (adapted from Martinson and Thomas, 2003) (Color figure
available online).
QUALITY CONTROL OF THE STORED RAINWATER

Inlet and Outlet Arrangements
The quality of stored water improves in several respects but deteriorates
in others, with time. The biggest beneficial impact of storage is that most
particulates get settled. It is advisable to arrange the inlet so that it goes all
the way to the bottom of the tank, as shown in the Figures 6 and 7. A ring
of material surrounding the inlet breaks the downward flow and prevents
it from disturbing any settled material. With this arrangement, the incoming
water remains in a zone on the bottom of the tank and does not disturb the
clearer water above it (Martinson, 2007; Martinson and Thomas, 2003).
The outlet to the tank is similarly important. As the dirtiest water is at
the bottom of the tank, it is best to take the water from the top. To do this
the outlet must be on a flexible hose with a float at the top. The float can
be anything that floats; successful examples have been made from discarded
mineral water bottles. To prevent entry of floating matter, the entrance to
the hose should be about 2 inches below the surface of the water.
Float
Hose
FIGURE 7. Ideal outlet arrangement (adopted from Martinson and Thomas, 2003) (Color
figure available online).
Overflow Arrangements
By proper management of overflow, water quality of the storage tank can
be protected to some extent. If the bottom-in top-out arrangement is used
(Figure 8A), the clearest of the tank water will be wasted away, replacing
it with dirtier water from the roof (Martinson, 2007; Martinson and Thomas,
2003).
A better arrangement is where the overflow water blocks any incoming
water, preventing it from mixing with the water stored in the tank (Figure
8B).
For larger tanks with well-designed inlets, the mix water will have a
lower impact and can therefore be used to perform cleaning tasks to actually
improve the quality of water in the tank. Figure 8C shows an arrangement in
which the overflow water is taken from the bottom of the tank. This means
that the overflow water will be the dirtiest water and also carry settled matter
with it, if there is any. A tank with an overflow of this design will never need
desludging but will need to have any floating matter skimmed from the water
surface periodically. In an area where most material entering the tank floats
to the top, the arrangement shown in Figure 8D may be preferable. In this
configuration the overflow acts as a suction pump as the water accelerates
FIGURE 8. Overflow arrangements (adapted from Martinson and Thomas, 2003) (Color figure
available online).
to fall into the overflow pipe. This tends to suck any floating matter into the
overflow, cleaning the top of the tank.
Rodents, frogs, and reptiles can enter rainwater tanks that do not have
screens on all inlets and outlets. They may bring in pathogens to the stored
water (Pinfold et al., 1993). The use of nylon-made mosquito nets is helpful
in preventing not only mosquitoes from entering and breeding in the storage
sumps but also other insects, reptiles, rodents, and frogs.
Impact of Storage on the Harvested Water Quality

It is believed that a number of processes operate to improve water quality
in a rainwater tank, including accumulation of microorganisms at the surface
air-water interface (the water surface microlayer), flocculation and settlement

in the tank, and the action of biofilms. A description of those processes is
given subsequently.
As stated previously, particulates settle out over time in the storage tank
of harvested rainwater, thereby making it clearer. For example, Coombes et
al. (2006) found accumulation of lead and iron in the sludge taken from the
bottom of a harvest storage tank. These and other metals may later reenter
the over lying water by getting leached out from the sludge and the walls
of the storage tank over time. But such leaching is generally low and is
disfavored if the water pH is close to or higher than neutral (6.57.5). At
lower pH values the leaching may be substantial (Meera and Ahammed,
2006). Therefore, great care should be exercised toward placing the tank
lining, and only materials certified as leachproof should be used.
Although some studies have shown that bacterial populations decline
with storage, some others have arrived at the opposing conclusion. A study
by Lye (1989) revealed that certain bacterial strains of Pseudomonas and
Aeromonas were able to grow from low initial levels (1 CFU/ml) to higher
concentrations (100 CFU/ml) during storage of collected rainwater. An addi-
tional study by Lye (1991) showed that long-term storage of rainwater did not
cause a decrease in levels of certain bacterial strains. However, Vasudevan
et al. (2001) reported that fecal coliforms, total coliforms, and fecal strep-
tococci decline rapidly in rainwater storage tanks. The possible reason for
this divergence is presumably linked to the difference in the availability of
nutrients and suitability of environmental conditions for growth existing in
different rainwater storage tanks. Plazinska (2001), based on a survey of over
100 rainwater tanks used by indigenous communities in rural Australia, re-
ported that the most prominent factor influencing the microbiological quality
was the tank capacity, with smaller tanks showing higher levels of bacterial
contamination. This happens, with the influx of bacterial contaminants being
equal, because a smaller tank acquires a larger concentration of the contam-
inants. Further, in smaller tanks, there are greater chances that sludge ac-
cumulated at the bottom of the tank may become agitated and get remixed
with the overlying water. Plazinska (2001) highlighted the importance of

first-flush devices in controlling microbiological contamination.
Certain types of bacteria concentrate at the surface microlayer of water.
Prescott et al. (1999) explained that in low-nutrient environments (e.g., rain-
water tanks), microorganisms form flocs to increase surface areas, allowing
greater capture of nutrients. Aquatic environments contain gradients of mi-
croorganisms in the water column that are dependent on the concentration of
oxygen and nutrients. Aerobic microorganisms will concentrate at the water
surface in a rainwater tank to utilize oxygen from the atmosphere and nu-
trients as they enter the tank at the water surface. Such microorganisms will
not pass into the water supplied to the household because water is drawn
from a point near the base of the rainwater tank. This process can eliminate
the transfer of bacteria that colonize water surfaces such as Legionella Spp.
from household water supplies.
The pH of rainwater usually increases slightly during storage in tanks.
Water sampled from ferrocement tanks, which is the most commonly used
material for storing collected rainwater in developing countries, is more likely
to be alkaline (Handia, 2005a, 2005b; Pushpangadan and Sivanandan, 2001;
Simmons et al., 2001). This is favorable to the processes that improve the
quality of the harvested rainwater during storage.
OTHER TREATMENT OPTIONS
If the stored water is not expected to be very clean because (a) water is
harvested in low rainfall areas from large surfaces or (b) water is carrying
accidental contamination (e.g., a frog or lizard dying in it), it should be
treated by standard methods used to bring raw water to drinking water
quality. The two essential steps are (a) clariflocculation and (b) disinfection.
Suspended fine particulate matter and colloidal materials can be sed-
imented out after flocculating them with the help of alum or polymeric
flocculants (Ramasamy et al., 2004). Very small-scale compact systems, ad-
equate for households, are now available in the Indian and other markets
that have provisions of filtration and disinfection.
Even if the water has been harvested from a well-maintained roof, it is
advisable to disinfect it before use for drinking. Although, for this purpose,
bleaching powder, potassium permanganate, and iodine can be used, but
each has its side effects. The most handy and safe disinfectant is heat; water
may be boiled for 34 min and then used for drinking after suitable cooling.
In fact, according to Spinks et al. (2003) potentially pathogenic bacteria are
eliminated rapidly from rainwater at temperatures of 60 C or greater. While
monitoring demonstration projects on roof top harvesting, it was seen that
domestic hot water services set at temperatures greater than 52 C consistently
TABLE 5. Time (in seconds) needed to kill selected bacteria at water temperature of 60
5 C
D-value (s)

Bacteria 55 C 60 C 65 C
E. coli 1,493 66 3
Shigella sonnei 586 54 3
Pseuodomonas aeruginosa 304 49 5
Salmonella typhimurium 77 4 <2
Klebsiella pneumoniae 35 <2 <2
eliminated bacteria from rainwater. This discovery led to further investiga-

tions on the impact of hot water on the viability of selected pathogens.

Potentially pathogenic bacteria were observed to be rapidly eliminated from
rainwater at temperatures of 60 C or greater. The time to eliminate 90% of
a bacterial population at a given water temperature (D-value) is shown for
selected bacteria in Table 5. These results suggest that rainwater supplied
to hot water services maintained at 60 C will provide water of adequate hy-
gienic quality. Other nonchemical disinfectants such as ultraviolet light are
also safe.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
It is much easier to control the quality of rooftop-based RWH than of the

runoff coming from the earth. But, if proper care is not taken, a rooftop
harvest can also carry hazardous substances. The possibility of chemical
as well as microbiological contamination exists, in addition to particulate
contamination. This has been borne out of numerous studies carried out in
different parts of the world.
To control the quality of rooftop RWH, the following steps are neces-
sary:
1. Ensuring that the rooftop surface is made up of water resistant material

that does not contribute any chemicals to the runoff;
2. Keeping the rooftop well dusted and broomed when rain is expected,
and keeping it well maintained in all other respects;
3. Installing screens at the inlet points of all pipes and drains leading to the
storage tank, which would prevent insects and dead animals from being
carried into the tank and also control other debris;
4. Organizing the first flush properly; and
5. Ensuring proper design of the storage tank, especially from the viewpoint
of managing overflow.
When a situation so warrants, as detailed in this article, further treatment,

especially flocculation-sedimentation and disinfection, may be done. These
steps are manageable even at the household level.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India,

for support in the form of an R&D project.
REFERENCES
Abbasi, S. A. (1997a). Wetlands of India, Volume I: Lakes of Peninsular India, Dis-

covery Publishing House, New Delhi, xii + 151 pages.
Abbasi, S. A. (1997b). Wetlands of India, Volume II: Lake Chilka, Discovery Publish-
ing House New Delhi, xiii + 182 pages.
Abbasi, S. A. (1997c). Wetlands of India, Volume III: Kerala, Discovery Publishing
House New Delhi, xiv + 276 pages.
Abbasi, S. A., and Abbasi, N. (2000). The likely adverse environmental impacts of
renewable energy sources. Applied Energy, 65(14), 121144.
Abbasi, S. A., and Chari, K. B. (2005). Comprehensive environmental impact assess-
ment of water resources projects. New Delhi, India: Discovery.
Abbasi, S. A., and Chari, K. B. (2008). Environmental managements of urban lakes.
New Delhi, India: Discovery.
Abbasi, S. A., and Khan, F. I. (2000). Greenbelts for pollution control: Concepts,
design, applications. New Delhi, India: Discovery.
Abbasi, S. A., and Ramesh, N. (2003). The theory and practice of environmental
impact assessment. New Delhi, India: Discovery.
Abbasi, S. A., and Soni, R. (1983). Stress-induced enhancement of reproduction
in earthworm Octochaetus pattoni exposed to chromium (VI) and mercury
(II)implications in environmental management. International Journal of En-
vironmental Studies, 22(1), 4347.
Abbasi, S. A., and Soni, R. (1984). Teratogenic effects of chromium (VI) in environ-
ment as evidenced by the impact on larvae of amphibian Rana tigrina: Impli-
cations in the environmental management of chromium. International Journal
of Environmental Studies, 22, 131137.
Abbasi, T., Kannadasan, T., and Abbasi, S. A. (2009). A study of the impact of acid
rain on chromium toxicity. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 66,
765771.
Abo-Shehada, M., Hindyia, M., and Saiah, A. (2004). Prevalence of Cryptosporidium
parvum in private drinking water cisterns in Bani-Kenanah district, northern
Jordan. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 14, 351358.
Adeniyi, I., and Olabanji, I. (2005). The physico-chemical and bacteriological quality
of rainwater collected over different roofing materials in Ile-Ife, southwestern
Nigeria. Chemistry and Ecology, 21, 149166.
Agarwall, A., and Narain, S. (1997). Dying wisdom: The rise, fall and potential of In-
dias traditional water harvesting systems. New Delhi, India: Centre for Science
and Environment.
Ahmed, W., Huygens, F., Goonetilleke, A., and Gardner, T. (2008). Real-time PCR de-
tection of pathogenic microorganisms in roof-harvested rainwater in Southeast
Queensland, Australia. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 74, 54905496.
Ahmed, W., Vieritz, A., Gardner, T., and Goonetilleke, A. (2009). Microbial risks
from rainwater tanks in southeast Queensland. Water: Official Journal of the
Australian Water and Wastewater Association, 36(8), 8085.
Al-Khashman, O. A. (2009). Chemical characteristics of rainwater collected at a
western site of Jordan. Atmospheric Research, 91 5361.
Al-Momani, I. F., Momani, K. A., and Jaradat, Q. M. (2000). Chemical composition
of wet precipitation in Irbid, Jordan. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, 35(1),
4757.
Al-Momani, I. F., Momani, K. A., Jaradat, Q. M., Massadeh, A. M., Yousef, Y. A., and
Alomary, A. A. (2008). Atmospheric deposition of major and trace elements in
Amman, Jordan. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 136, 209218.
Albrechtsen, H. J. (2002). Microbiological investigations of rainwater and graywa-
ter collected for toilet flushing. Water Science and Technology, 46(67), 311
316.
Appan, A. (1997). Roofwater collection systems in some southeast Asian countries:
Status and water quality levels. Journal of the Royal Society of Health, 117,
319323.
Ariyananda, T. (2005). Recommendations for improving rain water quality (a study
conducted In 2 districts in Sri Lanka). Paper presented at the 12th International
Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference, Mainsteaming Rainwater Harvest-
ing, November, New Delhi, India.
Ariyananda, T., and Mawatha, E. 1999. Comparative review of drinking water quality
from different rainwater harvesting systems in Sri Lanka. Papre presented at
the 9th Conference of International Rainwater Catchment Systems Association,
Rainwater Catchment: An Answer to the Water Scarcity of the Next Millennium,
July, Petrolina, Brazil.
Athanasiadis, K., Helmreich, B., and Horn, H. (2007). On-site infiltration of a copper
roof runoff: role of clinoptilolite as an artificial barrier material. Water Research,
41, 32513257.
Ayres, P. G. (1995). Water and solutes in host: pathogen relations. Aspects of Applied
Biology, 42, 161167.
Baez, A., Belmont, R., Garcia, R., Padilla, H., and Torres, M. (2007). Chemical com-
position of rainwater collected at a southwest site of Mexico City, Mexico.
Atmospheric Research, 86(1), 6175.
Bannister, R., Westwood, J., and Mcneill, A. (1997). Investigation of microbiological
and chemical water quality in rainwater tanks in Victoria. Victoria, Australia:
Department of Natural Resources and Environmental and Water.
Berndtsson, J. C., Emilsson, T., and Bengtsson, L. (2006). The influence of extensive
vegetated roofs on runoff water quality. The Science of the Total Environment,
355(13), 4863.
Beysens, D., Ohayon, C., Muselli, M., and Clus, O. (2006). Chemical and biologi-
cal characteristics of dew and rain water in an urban coastal area (Bordeaux,
France). Atmospheric Environment, 40, 37103723.
Bhatia, K. K. S., and Khobragade, S. D. (2005). Urban lakes in India: Conservation
management and rejuvenation. Roorkee, India: Anubhav.
Body, P. (1986). The contamination of rainwater tanks at Port Pirie. Adelaide, Aus-
tralia: South Australian Department for Environment and Planning.
Boller, M., and Mottier, V. (1998). Wasserwirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Regen-
wasserversickerung am Beispiel einer Region [Significance of rain water infiltra-
tion for urban water management on a regional basis]. Zeitschrift fur Kulturtech-
nik und Landentwicklung (Journal of Rural Engineering and Development), 39,
247254.
Bridgman, H. A. (1990). Global air pollution: Problems for the 1990s. London, Eng-
land: Belhaven Press.

Bridgman, H. A. (1992). Evaluating rainwater contamination and sources in southeast
Australia using factor analysis. Atmospheric Environment, 26A, 24012412.
Broadhead, A. N., Negron-Alvira, A., Baez, L. A., Hazen, T. C., and Canoy,
M. J. (1988). Occurrence of Legionella species in tropical rain water cisterns.
Caribbean Journal of Science, 24(12), 7173.
Brodribb, R., Webster, P., and Farrell, D. (1995). Recurrent Campylobacter fetus
subspecies fetus bacteraemia in a febrile neutropaenic patient linked to tank
water. Communicable Diseases Intelligence, 19, 312313.
Brouqui, P., Sekene, B., and Raoult, D. (2004). Q fever outbreak in homeless shelter.
Emerging Infectious Diseases, 10, 12971299.
Bucheli, T. D., Muller, S., Heberle, S., and Schwarzenbach, R. (1998a). Occurrence
and behavior of pesticides in rainwater, roof runoff, and artificial stormwater
infiltration. Environmental Science and Technology, 32, 34573464.
Bucheli, T. D., Muller, S. R., Voegelin, A., and Schwarzenbach, R. P. (1998b). Bitumi-
nous roof sealing membranes as major sources of the herbicide (R,S)-Mecoprop
in roof runoff waters: potential contamination of groundwater and surface wa-
ter. Environmental Science and Technology, 32, 34653471.
Cao, Y.-Z., Wang, S., Zhang, G., Luo, J., and Lu, S. (2009). Chemical characteristics
of wet precipitation at an urban site of Guangzhou, South China. Atmospheric
Research, 94, 462469.
Chang, M., Mcbroom, M. W., and Beasley, R. S. (2004). Roofing as a source of
nonpoint water pollution. Journal of Environmental Management, 73, 307315.
Colwell, R. R., Huq, A., Islam, M. S., Aziz, K. M. A., Yunus, M., Khan, N. H., Mahmud,
A., Sack, R. B., Nair, G. B., Chakraborty, J., Sack, D. A., and Russek-Cohen,
E. (2003). Reduction of cholera in Bangladeshi villages by simple filtration.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America,
100, 10511055.
Coombes, P. J., Dunstan, H., Anthony, S., Evans, C., and Harrison, T. (2005). An
overview of a decade of research into the quality of rainwater supplies collected
from roofs. Paper presented at the 12th International Rainwater Catchment Sys-
tems Conference, Mainsteaming Rainwater Harvesting, November, New Delhi,
India.
Coombes, P. J., Dunstan, H., Spinks, A., Evans, C., and Harrison, T. (2006). Key
messages from a decade of water quality research into roof collected rainwater
supplies. Paper presented at the 1st National HYDROPOLIS Conference, Perth.
Australia.
Coombes, P. J., Kuczera, G., and Kalma, J. (2000). Rainwater quality from roofs, tanks
and hot water systems at Fig Tree Place. Paper presented at the 3rd International
Hydrology and Water Resource Symposium: HYDRO 2000, November 2023,
Perth, Australia.
Corden, J., and Millington, W. (2001). The long-term trends and seasonal variation
of the Aeroallergen alternaria in Derby, UK. Aerobiologia, 17, 127136.
Crabtree, K. D., Ruskin, R. H., Shaw, S. B., and Rose, J. B. (1996). The detection of
Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts in cistern water in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Water Research, 30(1), 208216.
Crawley, J., and Sievering, H. (1986). Factor analysis of the MAP3S/RAINE pre-
cipitation chemistry network: 19761980. Atmospheric Environment, 20, 1001
1013.
Cunliffe, D. A. (1998). Guidance on the use of rainwater tanks. National Environ-
mental Health Forum monographs. Water Series; No. 3., Australian Health Com-
mission.
Davis, A. P., Shokouhian, M., and Ni, S. (2001). Loading estimates of lead, copper,
cadmium, and zinc in urban runoff from specific sources. Chemosphere, 44,
9971009.
Deltau, G. (2001). Einfuhrung in die egenwassertechnick in Deutschland [Intro-
duction to the Rainwater Techniques in Germany]. In International Regen-
wassertage (pp. 741746). Mannheim, Germany.
Demirak, A., Balci, A., Karaoglu, H., and Tosmur, B. (2006). Chemical character-
istics of rain water at an urban site of south western Turkey. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 123(13), 27183.
Dillaha, T. A., and Zolan, W. J. (1985). Rainwater catchment water quality in Mi-
cronesia. Water Research, 19, 741746.
Environment Agency. (2002). The microbiology of drinking water. Part 1: Water qual-
ity and public health (Blue Book No. 176). Nottingham, England: Environment
Agency.
Eberhart-Phillips, J., Walker, N., Garrett, N., Bell, D., Sinclair, D., Rainger, W., and
Bates, M. (1997). Campylobacteriosis in New Zealand: results of a case-control
study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 51, 686691.
Evans, C. A., Coombes, P. J., and Dunstan, R. H. (2006). Wind, rain and bacteria:
The effect of weather on the microbial composition of roof-harvested rainwater.
Water Research, 40(1), 3742.
Evans, C. A., Coombes, P. J., Dunstan, R. H., and Harrison, T. (2007). Identifying the
major influences on the microbial composition of roof harvested rainwater and
the implications for water quality. Water Science and Technology, 55, 245253.
Evans, C. A., Coombes, P. J., Dunstan, R. H., and Harrison, T. (2009). Extensive
bacterial diversity indicates the potential operation of a dynamic micro-ecology
within domestic rainwater storage systems. Science of the Total Environment,
407, 52065215.
Evison, L., and Sunna, N. (2001). Microbial regrowth in household water storage
tanks. Journal American Water Works Association, 93, 8594.
Ezcurra, A., Casado, H., Lacaux, J. P., and Garcla, C. (1988). Relationships between
meteorological situations and acid rain in Spanish Basque Country. Atmospheric
Environment 22, 27792786.
Forster, J. (1996). Patterns of roof runoff contamination and their potential impli-
cations on practice and regulations of treatment and local infiltration. Water
Science and Technology, 33(6), 3948.
Forster, J. (1998). The influence of location and season on the concentrations of
macroions and organic trace pollutants in roof runoff. Water Science and Tech-
nology, 38(10), 8390.
Forster, J. (1999). Variability of roof runoff quality. Water Science and Technology,
39(5), 137144.
Frankin, L. J., Fielding, J. E., Gregory, J., Gullan, L., Lightfoot, D., and Poznanski, S.
Y. (2009). An outbreak of Salmonella Typhimurium 9 at a school camp linked
to contamination of rainwater tanks. Epidemiology and Infection, 137, 434440.
Fujioka, R. S., and Chinn, R. D. (1987). The microbiological quality of cistern waters
in the Tantalus area of Honolulu. In 3rd International Conference on Rain
Water Cistern Systems (pp. F3F13). Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Fujioka, R. S., Inserra, S., and Chinn, R. (1991). The bacterial content of cistern waters
in Hawaii. In 5th International Conference on Rain Water Cistern Systems (pp.
3345). London, England: International Water Supply Association.
Gajalakshmi, S., and Abbasi, S. A. (2004). Neem leaves as a source of fertilizer-cum-
pesticide vermicompost. Bioresource Technology, 92, 291296.
Galpin, J. S., and Turner, C. R. (1999). Trends in composition of rain quality data
from the South African interior. South African Journal of Science, 95, 225228.
Garnaud, S., Mouchel, J. M., Chebbo, G., and Thevenot, D. R. (1999). Heavy metal
concentrations in dry and wet atmospheic deposits in Paris district: Comparison
with urban runoff. Science of the Total Environment, 235 235245.
Gee, L. (1993). Pilot survey of the microbiological and chemical aspects of water
stored in domestic rainwater tanks. Sydney, Australia: Western Sector Public
Health Unit, New South Wales Department of Health.
Ghanayem, M. (2001). Environmental considerations with respect to rainwater
harvesting. Paper presented at Rainwater International 2001: 10th Interna-
tional Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference, September 1014, Mannheim,
Germany.
Gould, J., and Nissen-Petersen, E. (1999). Rainwater catchment systems for domestic
supply: Design, construction and implementation, IT Publication, London, 300
pp.
Gromaire, M., Garnaud, S., Saad, M., and Chebbo, G. (2001). Contribution of different
sources to the pollution of wet weather flows in combined sewers. Water
Research, 35, 521533.
Gumbs, A. F., and Dierberg, F. G. (1985). Heavy metals in the drinking water from
cisterns supplying single-family dwellings. Water International, 10(1), 2228.
Haeber, R. H., and Waller, D. H. (1987). Water quality of rain water collection systems
in the Eastern Caribbean. Paper presented at the 3rd International Rainwater
Cistern Systems Conference, January, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Handia, L. (2005a). Comparative study of rainwater quality in urban Zambia. Journal

of Water Supply: Research and Technology-AQUA, 54(1), 5564.
Handia, L. (2005b). Comparative study of rainwater quality in urban Zambia. Aqua-
Journal of Water Supply, 54(1), 55.
Handia, L., Tembo, J. M., and Mwiindwa, C. (2003). Potential of rainwater harvesting
in urban Zambia. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 28(2027), 893896.
Hao, R.-X., Zhou, Y.-W., Liang, P., Wang, M.-M., Zhao, S.-Q., and Ding, Y.-Y. (2006).
Quality and stability analysis for the rainfall water and surface runoff water in
southeast region of Beijing Municipality. Journal of Environmental Science and
Health. Part A, Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineering,
41, 12931302.
Hattori, M., Shimamura, T., Iwashita, M., Ohashi, H., and Takaku, Y. (2008). Lead
isotope ratio in rainfall collected by a sequential sampler in Central Tokyo.
Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 6, 161165.

Hawker, J. I., Ayres, J. G., Blair, I., Evans, M. R., Smith, D. L., Smith, E. G., Burge,
P. S., Carpenter, M. J., Caul, E. O., B, C., Desselburger, U., Farrell, I. D., Saun-
ders, P. J., and Wood, M. J. (1998). A large outbreak of Q fever in the West
Midlands: Windborne spread into a metropolitan area. Communicable Disease
Public Health, 1, 180187.
He, W., Wallinder, I. O., and Leygraf, C. (2002). Runoff rates of zinc: A four-year
field and laboratory study. In Outdoor atmospheric corrosion (ASTM Special
Technical Publication, 1421, pp. 216229). Phoenix, AZ: ASTM International.
Heyworth, J. S., Glonek, G., Maynard, E. J., Baghurst, P. A., and Finlay-Jones, J.
(2006). Consumption of untreated tank rainwater and gastroenteritis among
young children in South Australia. International Journal of Epidemiology, 35
10511058.
Hollander, R., Bullermann, M., C, G., Hartung, H., Konig, K., Lucke, F. K., and
Nolde, E. (1996). Mikrobiologisch-hygienische aspekte bei der nutzung von
regenwasser als betriebswasser fur toilettenspulung, gartenbewasserung und
waschewaschen [Microbiological and hygienic aspects of the use of rain wa-
ter as process water for toilet flushing, garden irrigation and laundering]. Das
Gesundheitswesen, 58, 288293.
Hontoria, C., Saa, A., Almorox, J., Cuadra, L., Sanchez, A., and Gasco, J. M. (2003).
The chemical composition of precipitation in Madrid. Water, Air and Soil Pol-
lution, 146 3554.
Hoque, M., Hope, V., Scragg, R., and Kjellstrom, T. (2003). Children at risk of
giardiasis in Auckland: A casecontrol analysis. Epidemiology and Infection,
131, 655662.
Hu, G. P., and Balasubramanian, R. (2003). Wet deposition of trace metals in Singa-
pore. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 144, 285300.
Huston, R., Chan, Y. C., Gardner, T., Shaw, G., and Chapman, H. (2009). Characteri-
sation of atmospheric deposition as a source of contaminants in urban rainwater
tanks. Water Research, 43, 16301640.
Jones, A. M., and Harrison, R. M. (2004). The effects of meteorological factors on
atmospheric bioaerosol concentrations: A review. Science of the Total Environ-
ment, 326(13), 151180.
Jordan, F. L., Seaman, R., Riley, J. J., and Yoklic, M. R. (2008). Effective removal of
microbial contamination from harvested rainwater using a simple point of use
filtration and UV-disinfection device. Urban Water Journal, 5, 209218.
Keeley, A., and Faulkner, B. R. (2008). Influence of land use and watershed char-
acteristics on protozoa contamination in a potential drinking water resources
reservoir. Water Research, 42, 280313.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1997a). Accident hazard index: A multi-attribute
method for process industry hazard rating. Process Safety and Environmental
Protection, 75, 217224.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1997b). Risk analysis of a chloralkali industry situated
in a populated area using the software package MAXCRED-II. Process Safety
Progress, 16, 172184.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1997c). Risk analysis of an epichlorohydrin manufac-
turing industry using the new computer automated tool MAXCRED. Journal of
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 10, 91100.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1998a). DOMIFFECT (DOMIno eFFECT): User-friendly
software for domino effect analysis. Environmental Modelling and Software, 13,
163177.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1998b). Multivariate hazard identification and ranking
system. Process Safety Progress, 17, 157170.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (1999). Assessment of risks posed by chemical indus-
tries: Application of a new computer automated tool MAXCRED-III. Journal of
Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 12, 455469.
Khan, F. I., and Abbasi, S. A. (2001). An assessment of the likehood of occurence,
and the damage potential of domino effect (chain of accidents) in a typical
cluster of industries. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 14,
283306.
Khwaja, H., and Husain, L. (1990). Chemical characterization of acid precipitation in
Albany, New York. Atmospheric Environment, 24A, 18691882.
Kim, R. H., Lee, S., and Kim, J. (2005a). Application of a metal membrane for rain-
water utilization: Filtration characteristics and membrane fouling. Desalination,
177(13), 121132.
Kim, R. H., Lee, S., Kim, Y. M., Lee, J. H., Kim, S. K., and Kim, S. G. (2005b).
Pollutants in rainwater runoff in Korea: Their impacts on rainwater utilization.
Environmental Technology, 26, 411420.
Kim, R. H., Lee, S., Lee, J. H., Kim, Y. M., and Suh, J. Y. (2005c). Developing tech-
nologies for rainwater utilization in urbanized areas. Environmental Technology,
26, 401410.
Koplan, J. P., Deen, R. D., Swanston, W. H., and Tota, B. (1978). Contaminated
roof-collected rainwater as a possible cause of an outbreak of Salmonellosis.
Journal of Hygiene, 81, 303309.
Krampitz, E., and Hollander, R. (1999). Longevity of pathogenic bacteria especially
Salmonella in cistern water. Zentralblatt fur Hygiene und Umweltmedizin (In-
ternational Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine), 202, 389397.
Krishna, J. H. (1989). Cistern water systems in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Paper presented
at the 4th International Conference on Rain Water Cistern Systems, Manila, The
Philippines.
Levesque, B., Pereg, D., Watkinson, E., Maguire, J. S., Bissonnette, L., Gingras, S.,
Rouja, P., Bergeron, M. G., and Dewailly, E. (2008). Assessment of microbio-
logical quality of drinking water from household tanks in Bermuda. Canadian
Journal of Microbiology, 54, 495500.
Lighthart, B. (2000). Mini-review of the concentration variations found in the Alfresco
atmospheric bacterial opulations. Aerobiologia, 16, 716.
Loye-Pilot, M. D., Martin, J. M., and Morelli, J. (1986). Influence of Saharan dust on
the rain acidity and atmospheric input to the Mediterranean. Nature, 321 (6068),
427428.
Lucke, F. K. (1998). Betriebswasser in trinkwasserqualitatsinn oder unsinn? [Process
water of drinking quality, sense or nonsense?]. Paper presented at Innovation
Betriebs- und Regenwassernutzung, Frankfurt, Germany.
Lye, D. J. (1987). Health risks associated with consumption of untreated water from
household roof catchment systems. Journal of the American Water Resources

Association, 38, 13011306.
Lye, D. J. (1989). Virulence characteristics of bacteria isolated from cistern water syst-
sems in rural Northern Kentucky, USA. Paper presented at the 4th International
Conference on Rainwater Cistern Systems, August, Manila, The Philippines.
Lye, D. J. (1991). Microbial levels in cistern systems: Acceptable or unacceptable? Pa-
per presented at the 5th International Conference on Rainwater Cistern Systems,
Taiwan.
Lye, D. J. (2002). Bacterial levels in cistern water systems of Northern Kentucky.
Water Research Bulletin, 23, 10631068.
Mantovan, P., Pastore, A., Szpyrkowicz, L., and Zilio-Grandi, F. (1995). Characteriza-
tion of rainwater quality from the Venice region network using multiway data
analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 164, 2743.
Marquardt, W., Bruggemann, E., Auel, R., Herrmann, H., and Moller, D. (2001).
Tends of pollution in rain over East Germany caused by changing emissions.
Tellus B, 53(5), 529545.
Martinson, D. B. (2007). Improving the viabilities of roofwater harvesting in low
income countries. Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick.
Martinson, D. B., and Thomas, T. (2003). Improving water quality by design. Paper
presented at the 11th International Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference,
August, Mexico City, Mexico.
Martinson, D. B., and Thomas, T. (2005). Quantifying the first-flush phenomenon.
Paper presented at Mainsteaming Rainwater Harvesting: 12th International Rain-
water Catchment Systems Conference, November, New Delhi, India.
Mason, Y., Ammann, A. A., Ulrich, A., and Sigg, L. (1999). Behavior of heavy metals,
nutrients, and major components during roof runoff infiltration. Environmental
Science and Technology, 33, 15881597.
May, S., and Prado, R. (2006). Experimental evaluation of rainwater quality for non-
potable applications in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Urban Water Journal, 3,
145151.
Meera, V., and Ahammed, M. M. (2006). Water quality of rooftop rainwater harvesting
systems: A review. Journal of Water Supply: Research and Technology-AQUA,
55, 113.
Merritt, A., Miles, R., and Bates, J. (1999). An outbreak of Campylobacter enteritis on
an island resort, North Queensland. Communicable Diseases Intelligence, 23,
215220.
Mittal, P. K., Pathak, N., Vasudevan, P., and Thomas, T. H. (2001). Health im-
plications of widespread use of DRWH: Mosquito control. Paper presented at
Rainwater International 2001: 10th International Rainwater Catchment Systems
Conference, September 1014, Mannheim, Germany.
Moilleron, R., Gonzalez, A., Chebbo, G., and Thevenot, D. (2002). Determination
of aliphatic hydrocarbons in urban runoff samples from the Le Marais experi-
mental catchment in Paris centre. Water Research, 36, 12751285.
Murrell, W. G., and Stewart, B. J. (1983). Botulism in New South Wales, 19801981.
The Medical Journal of Australia, 1, 333340.
Nolde, E. (2007). Possibilities of rainwater utilisation in densely populated areas in-
cluding precipitation runoffs from traffic surfaces. Desalination, 215(13), 111.

Okochi, H., Kameda, H., Hasegawa, S., Saito, N., Kubota, K., and Igawa, M. (2000).
Deterioration of concrete structures by acid depositionan assessment of the
role of rainwater on deterioration by laboratory and field exposure experiments
using mortar specimens. Atmospheric Environment, 34, 29372945.
Olabanji, I., and Adeniyi, I. (2005). Trace metals in bulk freefall and roof intercepted
rainwater at Ile-Ife, Southwest Nigeria. Chemistry and Ecology, 21, 167179.
Olem, H., and Berthouex, P. (1989). Acidic deposition and cistern drinking water
supplies. Environmental Science and Technology, 23, 333340.
Peters, A., Weidner, K., and Howley, C. (2008). The chemical water quality in roof-
harvested water cisterns in Bermuda. Journal of Water Supply: Research and
TechnologyAQUA, 57, 153163.
Pinfold, J., Horan, N., Wirojanagud, W., and Mara, D. (1993). The bacteriological
quality of rain-jar water in rural northeast Thailand. Water Research, 27, 297
302.
Plazinska, A. (2001). Microbial quality of rainwater in selected indigenous commu-
nities in Central Australia. Paper presented at Rainwater International 2011:
10th International Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference, September 1014,
Mannheim, Germany.
Polkowska, Z. (2004). Examining the effect of the type of roofing on pollutant
content in roof runoff waters from buildings in selected districts of the city of
Gdansk. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 13, 191201.
Polkowska, Z., Gorecki, T., and Namiesnik, J. (2002). Quality of roof runoff waters
from an urban region (Gdansk, Poland). Chemosphere, 49, 12751283.
Polkowska, Z., Skarzynska, K., Gorecki, T., and Namiesnik, J. (2006). Formalde-
hyde in various forms of atmospheric precipitation and deposition from highly
urbanized regions. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry, 53, 211236.
Polkowska, Z., Tobiszewski, M., Gorecki, T., and Namiesnik, J. (2009). Pesticides
in rain and roof runoff waters from an urban region. Urban Water Journal, 6,
441448.
Potgieter, N., Becker, P. J., and Ehlers, M. M. (2009). Evaluation of the CDC safe
water-storage intervention to improve the microbiological quality of point-of-
use drinking water in rural communities in South Africa. Water SA, 35, 505516.
Prescott, L. M., Harley, J. P., and Klein, D. A. (1999). Microbiology. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Pushpangadan, K., and Sivanandan, P. K. (2001). Technology, quality and cost of
water from DRWH: A case study in Kerala, India. Paper presented at the 2001
Rainwater Harvesting Conference, New Delhi, India.
Pushpangadan, K., Sivanandan, P. K., and Joy, A. (2001). Comparative analysis of
water quality from DRWH and traditional sources: A case study in Kerala, India.
Paper presented at the 2001 Rainwater Harvesting Conference, New Delhi, India.
Quek, U., and Forster, J. (1993). Trace-metals in roof runoff. Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution, 68(34), 373389.
Radaideh, J., Al-Zboon, K., Al-Harahsheh, A., and Al-Adamat, R. (2009). Quality
assessment of harvested rainwater for domestic uses, Jordan. Journal of Earth
and Environmental Sciences, 2(1), 2631.
Ramasamy, E. V., Gajalakshmi, S., Sanjeevi, R., Jithesh, M. N., and Abbasi, S. A.
(2004). Feasibility studies on the treatment of dairy wastewaters with upflow
anaerobic sludge blanket reactors. Bioresource Technology, 93, 209212.
Ree-Ho, K., Lee, S., and Kim, Y.-M. (2003). Development of rainwater utilization
system in Korea. Paper presented at Towards a New Green Revolution and Sus-
tainable Development Through an Efficient Use of Rainwater: 11th International
Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference, Texcoco, Mexico.
Reshmi, N. (2006). Rainwater harvesting and groundwater recharge: Global, re-
gional, and local initiatives. Masters thesis, Pondicherry (Central) University
India.
Rinehart, F. (1983). Water quality of cistern water in St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands: Caribbean Research Institute.
Robertson, L. J., Campbell, A. T., and Smith, H. V. (1992). Survival of
Cryptosporidium- Parvum oocysts under various environmental pressures. Ap-
plied and Environmental Microbiology, 58, 34943500.
Rocher, V., Azimi, S., Gasperi, J., Beuvin, L., Muller, M., Moilleron, R., and Chebbo,
G. (2004). Hydrocarbons and metals in atmospheric deposition and roof runoff
in central Paris. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 159(1), 6786.
Rott, U., and Meyer, C. (2001). Versuche zur Prufung von Regenswasserfiltersystemen
nach DIN 1998 [Attempts to examine rainwater filter systems to DIN 1998]. Paper
presented at Regenwassernutzung und Bewirtschaftung im Internationalen Kon-
text (Rainwater Use and Management in the International Context), Mannheim,
Germany.
Ruskin, R. H., Krishna, J. H., and Beretta, G. A. (1992). Detection of legionella-
like organisms in cistern water,using a membrane filter technique. Caribbean
Journal of Science, 28(34), 134138.
Salve, P. R., Maurya, A., Wate, S. R., and Devotta, S. (2008). Chemical composi-
tion of major ions in rainwater. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and
Toxicology, 80, 242246.
Sanjay Gandhi, D. (2008). Rainwater garvesting in India and elsewhere: State-of-the-
art. Masters thesis, Pondicherry (Central) University, India.
Sarkar, C., and Abbasi, S. A. (2006). QUALIDEX: A virtual instrument for continuous
monitoring of water quality. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 119,
201231.
Sasaki, D., Pang, L., Minette, H., Wakida, C., Fujimoto, W., Manea, S., Kunioka, R.,
and Middleton, C. (1993). Active surveillance and risk factors for leptospirosis
in Hawaii. The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 48(1), 35.
Sazakli, E., Alexopoulos, A., and Leotsinidis, M. (2007). Rainwater harvesting, quality
assessment and utilization in Kefalonia Island, Greece. Water Research, 41,
20392047.
Sharpe, W. E., and Young, E. S. (1982). Occurrence of selected heavy metals in
rural roof-catchment cistern systems. Paper presented at the 1st International
Conference on Rain Water Cistern Systems, June, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Shier, R. P., Dollimore, N., Ross, D. A., Binka, F. N., Quigley, M., and Smith, P.
G. (1996). Drinking water sources, mortality and diarrhoea morbidity among
young children in Northern Ghana. Tropical Medicine and International Health,
1, 334341.
Simmons, G., Hope, V., Lewis, G., Whitmore, J., and Gao, W. (2001). Contamination
of potable roof-collected rainwater in Auckland, New Zealand. Water Research,
35, 15181524.
Simmons, G., Jury, S., Thornley, C., Harte, D., Mohiuddin, J., and Taylor, M. (2008).
A Legionnaires disease outbreak: A water blaster and roof-collected rainwater
systems. Water Research, 42 14491458.
Simmons, G., and Smith, J. (1997). Roof water probable source of Salmonella infec-
tions. NZ Public Health Report, 4(1), 5.
Singh, B. (2005). Techniques and methodologies for rainwater harvesting and a
study on its utilization at Pondicherry. Masters thesis, Pondicherry (Central)
University, India.
Smet, J., and Moriarty, P. (2001). DGIS policy support paper: Rooftop rainwater har-
vesting. Delft, the Netherlands: IRC.
Spinks, A. T., Coombes, P., Dunstan, R., and Kuczera, G. (2003). Water quality
treatment processes in domestic rainwater harvesting systems. Paper presented
at the 28th International Hydrology and Water Resource Symposium, November
1013, Novotel Northbeach, Wollongong, Australia.
Spinks, A. T., Dunstan, R. H., Coombes, P., Berghout, B., and Kuczera, G. (2005).
Tank sludge as a sink for bacterial and heavy metal contaminants and its capac-
ity for settlement, resuspension and flocculation enhancement. Paper presented
at Mainstreaming Rainwater Harvesting: 12th International Rainwater Catchment
Systems Conference, November, New Delhi, India.
Spinks, A. T., Dunstan, R. H., Harrison, T., Coombes, P., and Kuczera, G. (2006a).
Thermal inactivation of water-borne pathogenic and indicator bacteria at sub-
boiling temperatures. Water Research, 40, 13261332.
Spinks, J., Phillips, S., Robinson, P., and Van Buynder, P. (2006b). Bushfires and
tank rainwater quality: A cause for concern? Journal of Water and Health, 4(1),
2128.
Sturman, A. P., Tyson, P. D., and Dabreton, P. C. (1997). A preliminary study of the
transport of air from Africa to Australia and New Zealand. Journal of the Royal
Society of New Zealand, 27, 485498.
Sussman, M. (2002). Molecular medical microbiology. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
Taylor, R., Sloan, D., Cooper, T., Morton, B., and Hunter, I. (2000). A waterborne
outbreak of Salmonella Saintpaul. Communicable Diseases Intelligence, 24,
336339.
Texas Water Development Board. (2005). Texas guide to rainwater harvesting.
Austin, TX: Texas Water Development Board.
Thomas, T. H., and Martinson, D. B. (2007). Roofwater harvesting: A handbook for
practitioners. Delft, The Netherlands, IRC International Water and Sanitation
Centre.
Thurman, R. (1995). Evaluation of rainwater stored in collection tanks. Australian
Microbiologist, March 2022.
Tissot-Dupont, H., Amadei, M., Nezri, M., and Raoult, D. (2004). Wind in November,
Q fever in December. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 10, 12641269.
Tsakovski, S., Tobiszewski, M., Simeonov, V., Polkowska, Z., and Namiesnik, J.
(2010). Chemical composition of water from roofs in Gdansk, Poland. Environ-

mental Pollution (Barking, Essex: 1987), 158(1), 8491.
Tuffley, R. E., and Holbeche, J. D. (1980). Isolation of the Mycobacterium avium-M.
intracellulare-M scafulaceum complex from tank water in Queensland Aus-
tralia. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 39(1), 4853.
Tyson, P. D., and DAbreton, P. C. (1998). Transport and recirculation of aerosols
off Southern Africamacroscale plume structure. Atmospheric Environment, 32,
15111998.
Uba, B., and Aghogho, O. (2000). Rainwater quality from different roof catchments in
the Port Harcourt district, River State, Nigeria. Journal of Water Supply: Research
and TechnologyAQUA, 49, 281287.
Van Metre, P., and Mahler, B. (2003). The contribution of particles washed from
rooftops to contaminant loading to urban streams. Chemosphere, 52, 17271741.
Varghese, J., and Jaya, D. S. (2008). Drinking water quality assessment of rain water
harvested in ferro-cement tanks in Alappuzha district, Journal of Environmental
Science and Engineering. 50 (2), 115120.
Vasudevan, P., and Tandon, M. (2008). Microbial quality of rainwater from roof
surfaces. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research, 67, 432435.
Vasudevan, P., Tandon, M., Krishnan, C., and Thomas, T. (2001). Bacteriological
quality of Water in DRWH. Paper presented at Rainwater International 2001: 10th
International Rainwater Catchment Systems Conference, September, Mannheim,
Germany.
Vazquez, A., Costoya, M., Pena, R., Garca, S., and Herrero, C. (2003). A rainwater
quality monitoring network: A preliminary study of the composition of rainwater
in Galicia (NW Spain). Chemosphere, 51, 375386.
Waller, D., Sheppard, W., Paterson, B., Deon, W., and Feldman, D. (1984). Quantity
and quality aspects of rain water cistern supplies in Nova Scotia. Paper presented
at the 2nd International Conference on Rain Water Cistern Systems, June, U.S.
Virgin Islands.
Wang, Z., Liu, Z., Zhang, Z., and Liu, X. (2009). Subsurface drip irrigation scheduling
for cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) grown in solar greenhouse based on 20 cm
standard pan evaporation in Northeast China. Scientia Horticulturae, 123(1),
5157.
Weinstein, P., Macaitis, M., Walker, C., and Cameron, S. (1993). Cryptosporidial
diarrhoea in South Australia. An exploratory case-control study of risk factors
for transmission. The Medical Journal of Australia, 158(2), 117.
Willey, J. D., Bennett, R. I., Williams, J. M., Denne, R. K., Kornegay, C. R., Perlotto,
M. S., and Moore, B. M. (1988). Effect of storm type on rainwater composition
in southeastern North Carolina. Environmental Science and Technology, 22(1),
4146.
Wirojanagud, W. (1987). Rainwater contamination. Paper presented at the 3rd Inter-
national Rainwater Cistern Systems Conference, January, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Wirojanagud, W. (1991). Rainwater quality: Pathogens and heavy metals. Paper
presented at Rainwater Catchment for Future Generations: 5th International
Conference on Rain Water Cistern Systems, August, Keelung, Taiwan.
World Health Organization. (1996). Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Vol. 2:
Health criteria and other supporting information (2nd ed.). Geneva, Switzer-
land: World Health Organization.
World Health Organization. (2004). Guidelines for drinking-water quality. Vol. 1:
Recommendations (3rd ed.). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization.
Yaziz, M. I., Gunting, H., Sapari, N., and Ghazali, A. W. (1989). Variations in rainwater
quality from roof catchments. Water Research, 23, 761765.
Zhang, X., He, W., Odnevallwallinder, I., Pan, J., and Leygraf, C. (2002). Determi-
nation of instantaneous corrosion rates and runoff rates of copper from nat-
urally patinated copper during continuous rain events. Corrosion Science, 44,
21312151.
Zhong, Z., Victor, T., and Balasubramanian, R. (2001). Measurement of major organic
acids in rainwater in Southeast Asia during burning and non-burning periods.
Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 130(1), 457462.
Zhu, K., Zhang, L., Hart, W., Liu, M., and Chen, H. (2004). Quality issues in harvested
rainwater in arid and semi-arid Loess Plateau of northern China. Journal of Arid
Environments, 57, 487505.
Zinder, B., Schuman, T., and Waldvogel, A. (1998). Aerosol and hydrometer con-
centration and their chemical composition during winter precipitation along a
mountain slope II. Enhancement of below-cloud scavenging in a stably stratified
atmosphere. Atmospheric Environment, 22, 27412750.
Zobrist, J., Muller, S. R., Ammann, A., Bucheli, T. D., Mottier, V., Ochs, M., Schoe-
nenberger, R., Eugster, J., and Boller, M. (2000). Quality of roof runoff for
groundwater infiltration. Water Research, 34, 14551462.
Zunckel, M., Robertson, L., Tyson, P. D., and Rodhe, H. (2000). Modelled transport
and deposition of sulphur over Southern Africa. Atmospheric Environment, 34,
27972808.
Zunckel, M., Saizar, C., and Zarauz, J. (2003). Rainwater composition in northeast
Uruguay. Atmospheric Environment, 37, 16011611.

Abbas I 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abbas I 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Imperial College London Library]

On: 25 June 2014, At: 07:36

Critical Reviews in Environmental

Sources of Pollution in Rooftop

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2010.497438

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Sources of Pollution in Rooftop Rainwater

T. ABBASI and S. A. ABBASI

Contrary to the popular perception that rainwater harvested from

KEYWORDS: microbiological contamination, pollutants, rainwa-

Address correspondence to S. A. Abbasi, Center for Pollution Control and Environmen-

having been designed to collect and divert rainwater toward agricultural

Now, in the postmodern world, the growing shortage of water, more so

The Issue of RTH Water Quality

a significant extent if the rainwater is collected before its further pollution.

The Sources and Types of RTH Contaminants

FIGURE 1. Pathways of contaminants in the rooftop rainwater harvesting system (adapted

Even as the use of pesticides is coming under increasing scrutiny and

2. Fecal material deposited by birds, lizards, mice, rats, and insects;

These sources can also contribute chemicals (e.g., nitrogen, phospho-

CASE STUDIES: ROOFTOP RAINWATER QUALITY ACROSS

Effect of Acidic Rain

Mg: 0.9301.14330 While the concentrations of some

a tank, particularly one made of concrete or mortar, significantly raises the

vehicles, petrochemical and plastic-chemical industries, and pesticide appli-

Simazine: 160620 (Mean 420), 4.4%

water sources, the former is perceived as vastly superior in terms of micro-

supplies by Albrechtsen (2002), Crabtree et al. (1996), and Simmons et al.

in southwest Greece and the factors affecting it were extensively investi-

nent analysis revealed that microbiological parameters were affected mainly

Harvest Quality as a Function of Time

The Third-World Scenario

countries (Meera and Ahammed, 2006) present a similar picture.

efficacy of the use of traditional coliform indicator organisms from a differ-

CONTROL AND TREATMENT OF CONTAMINANTS

Prestorage Control of Water Quality

1. Roof geometry: size, inclination, exposure;

In the following sections we discuss the devices that can be used to

Screens and Filters

In the design of the inlet filters, two capabilities are to be maximized:

is needed to reconcile the conflicting requirements and maximize the filter

The filter should be easy to clean or largely self-cleaning;

Coarse Leaf Screen

FIGURE 2. Low-cost, self-cleaning inlet filter mounted on an inlet pipe.

icals, and animate as well as inanimate constituents (Martinson, 2007). Gen-

TABLE 4. Recommended first-flush amounts (in millimeters of rainfall) (Martinson, 2007;

Target turbidity (NTU)

50 0 1.5 2.5 3.5

First flush water

FIGURE 4. Automatic first flush arrangement (Color figure available online).

However, it is manual, necessitating the presence of a person capable of

Rainwater from roof

QUALITY CONTROL OF THE STORED RAINWATER

Impact of Storage on the Harvested Water Quality

air-water interface (the water surface microlayer), flocculation and settlement

with the overlying water. Plazinska (2001) highlighted the importance of

OTHER TREATMENT OPTIONS

eliminated bacteria from rainwater. This discovery led to further investiga-

tions on the impact of hot water on the viability of selected pathogens.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

It is much easier to control the quality of rooftop-based RWH than of the

1. Ensuring that the rooftop surface is made up of water resistant material

When a situation so warrants, as detailed in this article, further treatment,