Category: Science 9

Water Filter Challenge

by Pouya

Water Filtration Challenge Lab

 

Define:

The challenge that we had to solve was “make a water filter that will filter dirty water and make it clean enough to put back into the Coquitlam river with the materials given”. To complete this challenge, we used the design sheet to emphasize the problem and think of ways to solve it. Our group used the sheet to thoroughly brainstorm ideas and design models to try.

Discover:

We asked some questions in order to complete the challenge. One question was hat are the restrictions of the challenge? What will each material do for the filter? Finally, which materials should be used and why? We learned early on that the main restriction was the materials. There were a select few of materials that would be good for the filter and putting them together would be no easy task as each one would need to be used to its fullest potential. We researched our topic using many sites and they all gave us good information on what our materials can do and what they will be good at in the filter. For example, we learned that sand can get all the particles out of the water along with any unwanted bacteria if there was any. Along, with that we learned that rocks can catch debris and carbon is a great filter and de-smeller for filters as well. This all helped when creating designs for our water filter. We learned that certain combinations of materials were good like carbon with sand and filter paper or cotton balls with crystals and carbon. Also, we answered our final question and learned that certain materials should always be used. Carbon, for example should always be used as it de-smelled the water and filtered it as well. we also learned that sand was always good since it blocked lots of debris and that filter paper is always great as it can get anything left behind. This all helped as certain designs used combos of these to make good filters. For example, lots of carbon and sand with multiple layers of filter paper. Even with the restrictive materials we made good designs in order to get great results in the end.

Dream:

All our group members had good ideas to improve our designs even if they seemed unorthodox, these ideas especially came up when we were faced with big problem. For example, some of our material combos didn’t work to well even when they we essential materials so we came up with an idea it put them in a different order and put them in in different ways too. At the time it seemed like this wouldn’t make a difference put when we tried it, I went well and made good results. In the end we ended up coming up with a lot of ideas like this to address road blocks we had.

Deliver:

After making our designs, doing our research, and defining the problem and the restrictions that came with it we started to create our water filters. Our first filter had a sponge at the bottom then 2 sheets of filter paper followed my crystals, sand, carbon, crystals again, and finally a cheese cloth. When looking at the prototype before testing it was good, none of the materials got in the way of each other. Our logic was that the cheese cloth would catch any big debris while the crystals would separate the water. The sand would catch anything smaller while the carbon de-smelled it and cleaned it same with the filter paper. Finally, the sponge would get anything that was missed. After filtering the water through it the results weren’t too bad. The water was clear with no particles and it wasn’t as yellow although it was still yellowish, and it still smelled bad. By using the ph paper we saw that the dirty waters ph was 5 and the filtered waters was 5.5 to 6 which is a little better than before. the main problem was the smell and color of the water, so we focused on this with the next prototype. Our second prototype had a lot of cotton balls along with carbon and sand, with filter paper separating each layer and again with a sponge too. Our logic was that the cotton would catch pretty much everything while the filter paper and carbon  would filter the water better than before since there was more filter paper and finally the sponge to catch anything extra. This time when we filtered the water it was a lot better. The water wasn’t as yellow in fact it was more of a foggy white. The smell had improved too and wasn’t as bad as before. the ph however, had stayed the same as before it was still 5.5 to 6 ph. We built one last prototype in order to see if we could make the water even clearer. This time we took out the cotton and the sponge. We put a cheese cloth where the sponge would be, and it was held there with an elastic band. We had one layer of filter paper this time only. However, unlike before we added tons more carbon and sand. The reason we did this is because we thought it would make the water very clear and it would stop it from smelling altogether. When filtered the water was a lot like prototype number one. The water was yellowish and not as clear as prototype two. However, it didn’t smell as much as prototype one it was more like number two. But the ph just like the others was the same 5.5 to 6 ph. Altogether I believe that the second filter worked best out of all three we made.

 

Debrief:

At the end of the challenge when we finished and went through all our designs and saw what happened I will happily saw that we did well. Altogether, some of our prototypes failed put from that we learned and improved and that ended up making some good water filters and good results. We finally were able to produce a good working filter that also made clean water. At the end our filter turned the yellowish water into a clear/a little foggy water that didn’t smell as bad and was much cleaner than before, so all together our groups filter was very effective. Materials like the carbon, sand, filter paper, cheese cloth, and sponge remained while other like the crystals and cotton balls were removed for the best design. Most of the filtering materials performed just as I expected like the carbon, sand and a few others. However, some like the cotton balls, crystals, and sand didn’t exactly perform as I expected. I expected the cotton balls to catch more particles and filter the water better, but they just got mushy and collected only a few particles/debris. I expected the crystals to do a lot more however, it did almost nothing for our filter it barely even caught any particles. Finally, the sand it performed well however, I thought that it would be harder for the water to pass through it, but it went through the sand fast or at a medium pace usually. In the future, when I make a water filter, I plan to have a lot more sand and a lot more carbon while adding a little more of the other particles or keeping the same amount of them like before. But, in the end I enjoyed this challenge as I thought is was fun to do and I think that it is a good learning experience as well, I look forward to doing labs like this in the future.

Sites Used:

This video had a lot of good demonstrations and was very informative.

This site gave us a lot of good ideas for our filter.

Top 5 Easiest DIY Water Filters You Can Make At Home

 

 

Chemical Change Lab

by Pouya

Chemical Change Lab

Purpose:

When chemical reactions are made what substances are produced?

Procedure:

  1. Our reactants that we used instead of the other chemicals during the lab were Strontium chloride and sodium carbonate. We measured 10 ml of both then we filtered them both to get a white powder for the lab.
  2. The second thing we changed was the wooden stick. The lab procedures told us to use a wooden spoon soaked in the solution however, we used a metal rod soaked in the solution. We did this so that the fire wouldn’t burn the wood instead of the solution.
  3. The last thing we changed in the procedure was that we only used 10 ml of the liquids instead of the 25 ml we were supposed to use.

Data and Observations:

Observations:

While observing sodium carbonate I noticed that it was very fine and grainy almost like grains of sand. The color was obviously white, and it wasn’t see through at all it wasn’t even opaque. I tried to smell it however, it didn’t really have any distinct smell to it. When it was dissolved into a liquid it was very clear and again had no smell.

While observing strontium chloride I realized that it wasn’t very fine like the sodium carbonate in fact it was kind of pebbly and clumped together and it was very rigid. It was white just like the sodium carbonate and again it wasn’t see through or opaque at all. There wasn’t any unique or familiar smell either. When it was dissolved the strontium, chloride was just like the sodium carbonate because it was clear and had no smell.

Observations of changes:

One of the new substances we created was a white powder from the liquid reactants. The powder was a lot like the sodium carbonate when I observed it. The powder was white, non-see through, had no smell, and was fine like grains of sand.

Whenever we would filter the liquid forms of the reactants, they would become whiter and less clear which really surprised me. I though that the liquids would be clearer than before but instead it was whiter and cloudy or foggy. However, when we would filter that it left behind the powder and it became clear again.

Flame test results:

When putting the strontium chloride under the flame and watching it to my surprise it burned red. The color was noticeably redder than normal flames and it was a bright red. From what I observed it still behaved like a normal flame though and it didn’t make any unique smells. However, it was pleasing to the eye.

When soaking the metal rod in the sodium carbonate the flame that it produced was a bright orange. The orange seemed similar to normal flames however, it seemed a little more orange than usual to me. Again, it behaved like a typical flame and it didn’t have any other unique properties to it other than the color.

The mystery powder that was produced by mixing the two reactants burned orange like the sodium carbonate. I was expecting the color to be something completely different, but its color was like a normal flame instead. However, just like the other two it had no other properties that made it unique.

Analysis:

By mixing the two reactants which were strontium chloride and sodium carbonate there were two mixtures that the mystery substance could have been. First, it could have been Sr(CO3) or strontium carbonate. Second, it could have been NaCl or sodium chloride instead.

Conclusion:

I am guessing that the white powder we created from the liquids was sodium chloride as sodium chloride would probably burn orange or like a normal flame. I am also guessing that the liquids that passed through the filter were sodium carbonate and strontium chloride. I have learned that in a chemical reaction multiple things can occur. Firstly, when a chemical reaction happens the chemicals used I it become mixed and come together which sodium chloride is an example of. Secondly, that new things can be made completely like the different substances that were created from the reaction. Those are the things I learned about chemical change while doing this lab.

 

 

Climate Info Fluency

by Pouya

Climate Info Fluency

Part 1:

Question: What can you do in your backyard to prevent climate change?

 

Solution 1. The first solution that I found for my question was to plant trees. As trees grow, they absorb lots of carbon and other harmful emissions. By having trees in your backyard not only would you make clean air for yourself and others, but you would be helping to prevent global warming. Research has shown that if we cover most areas worldwide where trees have all been cut down, we could theoretically, take two thirds of carbon and other emissions out of the atmosphere. They would obviously take their time to grow and pull their weight. However, in the long run they are definitely a good choice and a cheap choice as well. some of the native trees here are the Sitka spruce, Bigleaf maple, Oregon white oak and the Grand fir. Just by planting one or two of those trees in your backyard would be a great way to prevent climate change.

Solution 2. The second solution that I found was to plant other types of plants. There have been lots of studies done on different plants to see if they were good at absorbing emissions. A study done by Nasa has shown six prominent plants that can absorb up to 90% of emissions that are around them. they are the English ivy, Boston fern, Peace lily, Snake plant, Chinese evergreen, and the Gerbera daisy. All these plants absorb lots of emissions while not taking up too much room. However, three out of six of these plants are the best to plant because of how much they absorb for the area they take up. Those plants are the Snake plant, English ivy, and Gerbera daisy. Just by planting a few of these six plants would be a massive help, and since they don’t take up too, much room they are another great solution.

Solution 3. The final solution that I found was to reduce water waste in your backyard. Water is used in many industries to make products or to grow food or raise animals. By wasting water there will be a higher demand for it which results in more pollution and emissions going in the air so more of it can be distributed. That is why reducing water waste in our backyard is important, and for that I have a good solution. One simple way to reduce water waste is to just replace old sprinklers or get your sprinklers inspected. By having just one leak in a sprinkler, it can waste up to 27,000 liters of water a year which is a lot. By getting old sprinklers replaced or inspected you can save your water bill and the environment, which is a huge help for yourself and climate change. Of course, though there is an even simpler way to reduce water was and that is to not over water anything. It might sound silly but overwatering your backyard can be just as bad as leaks in sprinklers. The easiest way to stop this from happening is to get a landscape professional to look at your area and plan out an effective system for your specific place.

 

Conclusion:

Altogether those are the solutions that I managed to find for my inquiry question. By completing this assignment, it opened my eyes to all the ways that can make a difference in the fight against climate change. Because of that and all the new knowledge I got I am satisfied with the way my assignment went.

 

Part 2:

Question 1. Here are the sub questions I used and here are the answers that I got for them too.

  1. By planting trees in your backyard will they absorb carbon at a fast-enough pace?
  2. Are there any other plants that absorb large amounts of carbon?
  3. How can I reduce water waste in my backyard?

 

  1. Planting trees is a good and cheap way to prevent global warming. As trees grow, they absorb lots of carbon and other emissions in the air. Some estimates claim that by planting extra trees worldwide we could take up to, two thirds of the carbon and other emissions in the hair which Is amazing. Through research it is shown that by planting native species of trees in different areas throughout the globe, we could cover anywhere from 0-1.2tn off land. Some native tree species around here are the Sitka spruce, Grand fir, Bigleaf maple, and the Oregon white oak. Just by planting one or two of those trees in a backyard or around a house would be a great way, to prevent climate change.

 

  1. There are many plants that have been studied to see if they can absorb large amounts of carbon and other harmful emissions. A study done by NASA has shown a group of plants that are specifically good for this job while not needing to take up too much space. There are six good ones to plant they are, the Boston fern, Peace lily, Snake plant, Chinese evergreen, English ivy, and the Gerbera Daisy. Some of these plants can soak up to 90% of emissions that are around them at any given time. There are three specific ones that are especially good, and they don’t take up too much room either. There is the Snake plant, English ivy, and Gerbera Daisy. While these plants aren’t that big for their size, they can absorb large amounts of emissions. Just by planting a few of these plants would help I the fight against climate change and they would make lots of fresh air for you to enjoy too.

 

  1. Wasting water can have affects alongside climate change. Water is used in may steps in factories. By wasting water more and more is used to make consumer products resulting in lots of emissions going in the air. To produce food like meat and drinks like soda, lots of water is used to create those. An example is the farming industry is about 75% of water composition each day. Wasting water just leads to a higher demand for it, and that creates more emissions. If we wasted less water industries like farming wouldn’t have to use as much and there are a few ways to do exactly that. One very simple way is to make sure that your backyards sprinklers are effective and don’t have any leaks. By having just one leak in a sprinkler you can waste upwards of 27,000 liters of water a year, which is a lot. By just replacing old sprinklers or getting them inspected by a professional could help reduce water waste very well. The simplest way to reduce water waste of course though is to not overwater everything in your backyard or lawn. Overwatering can result I a lot of water waste, and he easiest way to sort it out is to get a landscape professional to look at your area and to find a good water system for your specific area.

 

Question 2. The digital tools that I used to research were Google, YouTube, and Duck Duck Go. A new digital tool that I used to research my top was Microsoft Edge.

 

Question 3. The Process I used to research my topic was to get a good question first. After I had a good question, I would research it using all the tools I knew how to use like Google or YouTube while using new ones like Edge. After I found information, I would check it to see if it was legitimate and then take notes. After doing all that I would start to make my rough draft and eventually my good copy to publish.

 

Question 4. The way I verified my information was through multiple steps. First, I would see what their motive was for passing out that knowledge. For example, were they using the article to sell merchandise or something like that? Next, I would see if there are any errors or things that are inconsistent throughout the article or whatever I was looking at. After that, I would use other sites to check the information, basically to see if it was agreed upon by other people too and not just that one site. If other sites or most sites didn’t say the same, it was probably opinion and not fact. Finally, I would check whoever made the information or passed it out to see if they were credible, I also did the same with the website it was on. That is how I verified the information that I found through my research.

 

Question 5. The process of completing this challenge went fairly well. Throughout the entire adventure I managed to follow the instructions strongly. The steps I had to follow were always an extra challenge. However, I always managed to come through in the end while still doing it to the best of my ability. There is one main thing I feel like I could have done better and that is when I was collecting my information. The notes that I took when researching were very sloppy. The notes were all over the place and they never really were organized well. That is what I would like to do better on next time.

 

Sites:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/04/planting-billions-trees-best-tackle-climate-crisis-scientists-canopy-emissions Damien Carrington – Thursday 4 July 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPNYdSZRSdg Video by YouTube channel Quartz – December 1, 2017

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930073077.pdf  NASA – John C. Stennis – September 15, 1989

https://www.loveyourlandscape.org/expert-advice/water-smart-landscaping/water-saving-tips/10-easy-ways-to-save-water-in-your-yard-and-garden/ National Association of Landscape Professionals

https://healthfully.com/effects-wasting-water-8441014.html Jack Powell – July 27, 2017

Aquatic Field Studies

by Pouya

Aquatic Field Studies

 

The Coquitlam River:

In science class we went down to The Coquitlam River in order to take samples of the invertebrates. Which included identifying and collecting them for a while in order to study them. Along with that we also took samples of the temperature of the air and water and we took a sample of the water to see what the quality of the river is.

 

Water Quality:

At the river just by looking at its entire length you could tell many things about the water quality. Firstly, the water was very clear for the most part which was a good sign along with the fact that it flowed well and there weren’t any plastics in it. Secondly you could tell the quality of the water by some of the animals the groups collected there. One of the specimens we caught in my group was a stonefly nymph. After looking at appendix one and after identifying the stonefly it says that they cannot tolerate pollution at all. This is a good sign as it probably means that the water quality is good because if it was bad then you wouldn’t find any stonefly nymphs at all. After all that examination we tested the area and the quality of the water too. The rivers overall water quality mark was 89.76. This is a good mark and it shows too, through all the examination we did on the river. Altogether, I am very satisfied with the water quality as there are animals, clear water, and lots of vegetation which is great for any ecosystem and to top it all off the rivers score is good as well because the river has just the right amount of everything.

 

Invertebrate Sampling:

One of the insects my group found was the stonefly nymph. The stonefly nymph is a small insect with lots of legs and two tails. This generally is a good sign as it means that the water quality is pretty good because stonefly nymphs live in good water quality. Most of the other groups found mayfly nymphs at the river. Yet again this is a good sign the reason, is because mayfly also need good water quality to live in which means that the rivers water quality is very good if both stonefly and mayfly nymphs can live in it.

 

Oxbow Pond:

After we were done taking samples of The Coquitlam River, we went down to Oxbow Pond the next day to also test its water quality and invertebrate. We did this to see how our local ecosystem was doing along with the ecosystem in that pond. Just like the river we identified the invertebrates and tested the water to see how good the water quality is.

 

Water Quality:

Before taking samples of the water at the pond I observed what it looked like first. When first looking at it you could tell that the turbidity of the pond was high as it was murky and hard to see through. This of course doesn’t’ mean its bad it’ s just very murky. In the water there weren’t any visible pollutants and there was lots of vegetation around the pond. So just by observing the pond seemed healthy. After all the observations it was time to collect samples of the water and to examine the invertebrates in the pond. My group managed to collect multiple fish from the pond, a dragon fly nymph, an aquatic worm, and finally an aquatic sow bug. Finding an aquatic sow bug and dragonfly nymph probably meant that the water quality was fair or good as they can live in either. Finding a worm might mean that the water quality isn’t good however, they can also live in good water quality too. Overall, by finding these animals I would say that the quality of the water was fair to good and the overall water quality score supports this too, as it’s 74.14 which is fair. Overall, I would say that the score and our findings are accurate as the ecosystem and pond was healthy and by looking at it you could tell that too. I am also happy to know that our pond is healthy just like The Coquitlam River.

 

Invertebrate Sampling:

Some of the animals we found were fish, the aquatic sow bug, an aquatic worm, and a dragon fly nymph. When looking at all those invertebrate and seeing where they were on the index, with some living and any water quality and some living in fair and good you could tell much about the water quality. The other groups also found many animals and there was lots of diversity among them. some people found the same things as us for example, the dragon fly nymphs, the sow bugs, and the fish. However, some groups also found snails and true bug adults. Those animals showed again that the water was probably of fair quality since they could inhabit the water. By putting all the samples together, it is probably likely that the water is fair quality since it has those animals in it which shows its water is pretty good, which is also good for the ecosystem.

 

Site Comparison:

By analyzing the results from both the river and pond and by observing them there are many things that can be compared in them. Firstly, the pond was much murkier and harder to see through, it was very opaque. The river on the other hand was much clearer and was very transparent. Secondly, the pond didn’t flow and all and wasn’t very steep either. However, the river flowed and a fast pace and was a little steep along with the areas surrounding it. Third, the bottom of the pond was very muddy and stick while, the river had lots of rocks and pebbles. Finally, the vegetation that was surrounding both of them. Both the bond and river had lots of vegetation surrounding them the only difference was that the pond had trees blocking some sunlight while the river wasn’t blocked nearly as much. But of course, the main comparisons that can be made is the water quality and the invertebrates. The river and the pond had different elements for both invertebrates and water quality. At the pond you could clearly see that there was a lot of turbidity because the water was murky, this is what brought its water quality down more than the river. You could see the affects of the turbidity because the quality of the water was less than the river, as it is 74.14 and the river is 89.76. the river on the other hand was clear and had less turbidity which probably raised its score more than the pond. The other comparison that can be made between the two is the invertebrates that live in their water. Because, the river had better quality you usually found invertebrates that live in good or fair water quality. Since, the ponds quality is less you could usually find fair and poor water quality invertebrates which doesn’t mean the water is polluted badly it just means that its more habitable to those creatures because its turbidity is higher. the one big thing the two had in common was that they both had lots of diversity in their ecosystems.

 

Putting It All Together:

The relation between the water quality and the diversity of the invertebrates is defiantly strong. An example would be the river and the pond. Even though the ponds quality isn’t too much worse than the river you can still see massive diversity in the invertebrates. Even the smallest details it can make a big difference. Again, the pond and the river are a good example of this because of the turbidity. Even when the only real difference between the pond and river was the turbidity, it still lowers the quality enough to allow more of certain types of invertebrates to want to live there, like the snail or aquatic worm. In conclusion I believe that the relationship between the water quality and the invertebrate’s diversity is a very powerful and strong one, and one we should not harm or interfere with.

 

Reflection:

I learned many things from the activities that we did. I learned how important the water quality is to the ecosystem and the invertebrates that live in it. I also learned how to determine what the quality of the water and how many different and unique invertebrates live in different types of water quality. I thought that the activities were very enjoyable. All the activities we did outside were fun like when we went out on the river in chest waders while remaining educational when we had to examine them and identify them after we caught them. They also helped me learn about watersheds more. The only thing that I can think of to make the activities more meaningful is if we get to explore the water ecosystem a little bit more because it would help us learn more and it would be fun too.