Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
20 January 2021 | Story Elsabe Brits | Photo SADC-GMI
Dr Eelco Lukas, a geohydrologist, is the Director of the Institute for Groundwater Studies at the University of the Free State (UFS).
Nearly two-thirds of South Africa depends solely or partially on groundwater for domestic needs, and in a water-stressed country this source is becoming increasingly important. But we need to use it wisely.

Dr Eelco Lukas, a geohydrologist, is the Director of the Institute for Groundwater Studies at the University of the Free State (UFS). He explains that all the natural water found in the earth’s subsurface is called groundwater. “When we look hard enough, we can find groundwater almost everywhere.  But that does not mean that we can start pumping groundwater at any location.  In many places, the amount of groundwater available (yield) is so little, or the water so deep that it is not financially viable to pump it.  Another problem might be the quality of the water.”

Numerous towns and communities depend solely on groundwater and many towns use a combined supply of surface and groundwater. When the town or settlement is far from any surface water and groundwater is available, boreholes are drilled. Depending on the size of the settlement, the boreholes are equipped with electrical or hand pumps.

Most of the big cities use surface water in their water pipes. Almost all big cities worldwide are located close to a supply of freshwater.  Cape Town has drilled many boreholes in the past two years to augment the city’s water supply.  However, problems can arise when a borehole is drilled for a community with a certain number of people, and soon there are more people than the borehole can supply for. It is not so much a case of the ‘borehole drying up’ but that the capacity has been exceeded.

Misconceptions about groundwater

With increasing drought and water restrictions being imposed, many people opted for their own borehole. When so many people draw water from the same source, the water table will drop. It can be compared to drinking a milkshake, but when five other people also drink with straws from the same milkshake, all will be left thirsty. 

Dr Lukas says because groundwater is something that cannot be seen with the naked eye, the general public has many misconceptions about groundwater. Some people think that you can drill a hole just anywhere and that you will find water, while others believe that water flows in underground rivers. It generally moves very slowly, only a few metres per year. And if it rains in a specific place, it does not mean that water will reach a particular borehole.

“Sustainable groundwater usage is the certainty that enough groundwater is available in years to come.  Sustainability is dependent on two external factors, namely demand and supply.  Unfortunately, both these factors are beyond the control of the geohydrologist.  When enough water is available for a community, the chances are that the community starts to grow, thereby enlarging the demand.  If the higher demand cannot be met, sustainability is no longer possible. When a change in rainfall pattern results in a decline of the precipitation, the groundwater recharge will become less, resulting in a lower supply of water.”


How does water move?

Groundwater moves through openings in the subsurface. These openings can be large (a millimetre to a few centimetres), but most of the time they are small, only a fraction of a millimetre. These are called pore spaces.  Water can only move through the pores if the pores are connected to other pores. The ease with which water can move through the rock is called hydraulic conductivity and is expressed in volume per area per time.  

Dr Lukas explains that different types of rock have different sizes of pore openings. The speed at which water can move through unconsolidated materials ranges from 1 000 m/d (gravel) to 10-8 m/d (clay). Consolidated materials range from 1 000 m/d (highly fractured rock) to 10-7 m/d (shale).  Sandstone, a rock that occurs in abundance in South Africa, has a typical hydraulic conductivity of 10-2 m/d, meaning that the speed at which the water flows is around 1 cm/d, which is less than 4 metres per year.  

In a way, you can compare groundwater flow to a pipe filled with marbles.  If you remove one marble at the one side, a marble may enter the pipe on the other side.  Although it may take the marble a long time to reach the other side of the pipe, the movement of the marbles is noticed almost immediately, says Dr Lukas.

Before groundwater is used, experts must make sure that it is suitable, Dr Lukas says. This is one of the areas that the Institute of Groundwater Studies at the UFS excels in. The institute also provides a complete service to industries through field investigations, the development of specialised field equipment, a well-equipped commercial and water research laboratory, and a number of computer models for the management of the aquifers, protecting them from pollution.

There are different standards for different purposes.  The best-known standard is the drinking 
water standard (SANS 241).  The water is tested for microbiology, as well as for the physical, aesthetic, operational and chemical determinants, and for the taste and colour.

There are several geophysical methods to locate groundwater.  “It must be stressed that the geophysical methods do not actually indicate places with water, but rather places where the geology and geological features support the presence of groundwater,” he says.

Different techniques are used to ‘look’ at different depths.   Water found close to the surface (upper 20 m) is often young water, meaning that it has been recharged not too long ago.  Because it is so close to the surface, it is vulnerable to contamination.   Deeper water is probably a bit older and because it is farther below the surface, it is more protected against surface contamination and the quality of this water is generally good.  Really deep groundwater (> 200 metres deep) will be even older and may have elevated salt content due to the long residence time of the water.

How much groundwater do we have?

Groundwater is a significant source of water, and in some parts of the country the only source of potable water.  According to the Department of Water Affairs and Sanitation, the most recent estimate of sustainable potential yield of groundwater resources at high assurance is 7 500 million m³/a, while current groundwater use is estimated at around 2 000 million m³/a. Allowing for an underestimation on groundwater use, about 3 500 million m³/a could be available for further development.  Unfortunately, if there is a shortage of water on one side of the country, it cannot be supplemented with water from the other side.
 
With a drought, the amount of water falling from the sky is below average, which means that the available water to recharge is also less. With less recharge water, the groundwater levels will decline.  To make things worse during a drought, groundwater users will pump more water to make up the deficit in rainfall, thereby accelerating the drop in water levels.

“Groundwater can be used to help humanity. The pore space in aquifers can be used to store water during a wet period, to be used later during a drought. This is called water banking, where water is injected into the aquifers (artificial recharge) during a period when there is enough water and pumped from the same aquifer during a period of water shortage,” says Dr Lukas. 

News Archive

Questions about racial integration in residences answered
2007-07-31

Answers to frequently asked questions about the racial integration of student residences at the UFS

1. Why does the UFS want to change the current situation in the student residences?

There are many reasons why a new approach to placement in the student residences is necessary. However, the main reason is of an educational nature. As a university, the UFS should create an environment in its residences where students can learn to appreciate and respect the rich diversity that is on offer at the university. A university accommodates students from many different backgrounds in terms of race, language, religion, economic status, culture and other aspects. If a student can learn to appreciate the value in this rich diversity at university, he or she will also be able to appreciate the value of this diversity in the workplace and broader society.

The current situation of predominantly white and predominantly black residences has not been able to cultivate such an appreciation for diversity and respect for one another as human beings, and will not equip students with the knowledge and skills required to manage diversity.

Besides this, there are many other areas of life in the residences that need attention. For one, we need to urgently establish a human rights culture in the residences so that the rights of all students can be respected. We need to address the abuse of alcohol, provide disabled students with their rightful place, and last but not least, really entrench a culture of learning in student residences.

Let us make the residences places we can be proud of – places of learning, of diversity, of respect; places of growth and development. This is the ideal we should all strive to achieve.  

2. Why does the management want to force us to integrate?

It is a false argument to debate the issue in terms of “force”. Any decision by a University, or any other organisation, regarding matters of policy, rules and regulations implies a restriction on the choice of an individual and an obligation to comply.  What we should focus on is whether this decision of the Council is in the best interests of our students.

The management of the university believes that it has a responsibility to give students the best education possible, not only in terms of what you learn in the lecture rooms, but especially in the residences as well. The residences can be very powerful places of learning about matters of great importance, both academic and non-academic.

The parallel-medium language policy separates students into largely white/Afrikaans and black/English classes. Efforts are being made to bridge this divide in the classroom, but we can also try to eliminate it in the residences.

The university is committed to building a new culture for the entire institution that is based on values and principles – such as an academic culture, non-racialism, respect for human rights and diversity – among staff and students.

In the context of student residences, the application of these values and principles still allows substantial room for the voluntary exercising of choice by individuals as well as by Residence Committees, notably with regard to the placement of students (they can still place 50 percent of first-year students), as well as the determination of the future character and traditions of a diverse residence.

Furthermore, students can still choose their residences (subject to availability of places), can choose a roommate, and so forth.

3. What about freedom of association?

The rights we enjoy in a democracy must be balanced against other rights, as well as the laws of the country. This means that the right to freedom of association must be balanced against laws that make it illegal to discriminate against other people on the basis of race, language or religion, for instance.

Freedom of association pertains to the right of individuals to form voluntary organisations such as clubs or private boarding houses, or their right to join or not join existing organisations.  You exercise that right when you decide to become a student of the UFS, and again when you choose to live in one of its residences.

However, once you have decided to join an organisation voluntarily, you cannot subsequently demand that that organisation should provide a “club” or residence to your liking where, for instance, you only associate with your choice of co-members. You must accept the policies of that organisation.

In any case, how would that right of yours be balanced against the right of another individual who wishes to associate with a different set of co-members? (For instance – what about the freedom of a student to associate with students NOT from his own background, but indeed from another language, cultural, racial or economic background?) 

The constitutional right to freedom of association can, in any case, not be used to exclude or discriminate on the basis of race or religion (Section 18 of the Bill of Rights).

Besides, the new policy guidelines will still make provision for freedom of association. This right can be exercised freely within a diverse residence with regard to friendships, joint academic work, socialising, sport, etc.

4. Will residences not lose their traditions?

The University appreciates that there are many valuable elements of tradition in residences. However, we must bear in mind that the traditions and character of student residences have evolved and changed over time, and they will continue to evolve and to change. In addition, we do not need to accept all aspects of residence life purely on the basis of tradition, including the unacceptably high level of alcohol abuse and unsavoury, humiliating and discriminatory orientation practices. The new approach to integrated residences provides the opportunity to retain the positive aspects of the current traditions and character, but also to develop new traditions and give residences a new character.

We can now establish a tradition and a character for each residence that are reconcilable with the values of the University as a place of scholarship and are aligned with the human rights approach of our country’s Constitution, the laws of our country and the strengths and diversity of the students in a particular residence.

5. Have students been involved in this process? Is there a role for them to play after the decision has been taken by the Council of the UFS?

In the first semester of 2007, during two rounds of consultations, the primes, SRC and student organisations were consulted about the proposed new placement policy to increase diversity in residences. Some residences also made written submissions on the matter (such as Madelief, Soetdoring, Wag-'n-bietjie, Vergeet-my-nie, Emily Hobhouse). Other residences requested and were granted more time, but did not make any submissions in the end (such as Reitz and Armentum).

Management also had several meetings with the above-mentioned structures to hear first-hand from students their concerns and solutions regarding possible challenges presented by integration in residences.

During these interactions, several excellent ideas and proposals were put forward by students. These views had a definite impact on the eventual proposal that was taken to the University Council, in particular regarding the minimum level of diversity (30%) in junior residences and the fact that residences still want to have a say in the placement of students, rather than the placement decision being left in the hands of Management alone (hence the 50% placement portion of residences). Management values the effort that was put into the process by the primes and residence committees, and thanks them for their contributions.

However, it should be stressed that consultation should not be understood as a process of negotiation, nor does it imply that consensus must be reached. What it means is that Management must take a considered decision after hearing the views of stakeholders.

Management would like students to continue to provide input and ideas regarding the implementation details of the policy guidelines. Task teams have been established and students will be informed about how they can interact with the task teams on an ongoing basis.

6. But integration in the residences was tried in the past (in the late 1990s), and then it failed. Why will it work now?

Yes, the University of the Free State did integrate its residences as far back as 1993, and for a few years it worked. The UFS did it at that time and is now doing so again, because it is the right thing to do. Yet it is important to understand why the previous attempt at racial integration in residences was not successful.

Firstly, both black and white students were much polarised because of the apartheid past. Secondly, there was insufficient management support for students in the residences, the student leaders generally as well as residence heads, in terms of dealing with diversity and related issues. Thirdly, the institutional culture of the UFS and the residences in particular was not addressed as part of broader transformation and integration in residences, whereas it is now being addressed.

In addition, the current decision to integrate residences has the benefit of being implemented after several more years of integration in schooling, sport, workplaces and other aspects of life.

This decision is also based on Management’s commitment to give all the possible support it can to this process.

This is a very important initiative that the UFS is undertaking. Management, in co-operation with students, must ensure that it succeeds. Integrated residences that produce high-quality graduates equipped to deal with the challenges of the workplace and our society is a worthwhile ideal we should all strive to achieve.

If you would like to make a proposal regarding the implementation and practical aspects of the new policy, please send it to the following email address: rector@ufs.ac.za

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept