[Water_news] 4. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: WATER QUALITY - 5/9/08

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

May 9, 2008

 

4. Water Quality –

 

 

 

Editorial:

Toxin lethargy

Riverside Press Enterprise – 5/8/08

 

 

Water Shortage Concerns: City Contemplates Going From Toilet to Tap: Tuscon residents may soon be drinking treated wastewater as part of a growing national trend to offset diminishing freshwater sources.

Natural News 5/8/08

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

 

Editorial:

Toxin lethargy

Riverside Press Enterprise – 5/8/08

 

Federal regulators' continued failure to act on a toxin in drinking water is neither defensible nor acceptable. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should stop stalling and set a drinking water standard for perchlorate, to protect the public and spur cleanup efforts.

 

EPA assistant administrator Benjamin Grumbles told the Senate this week that there was a "distinct possibility" the agency would not limit perchlorate in drinking water at all. Yet Grumble also argued against proposed legislation that would force the agency to set a perchlorate standard -- seeming oblivious to the fact that the EPA's own inaction drives that proposal.

 

Perchlorate, a chemical used in rocket fuel and explosives, can impair thyroid function and affect brain and nerve development in fetuses. A Government Accountability Office report last year found the chemical at 395 sites across the nation. The toxin taints water supplies across the Inland region, as well, including 22 wells in Colton, Rialto and Fontana.

 

The evidence about the hazards from perchlorate in drinking water is already clear. A Centers for Disease Control study last year found that small doses of perchlorate -- smaller than even California's current water standards allow -- were a health threat to about a third of U.S. women.

 

However, the EPA wants more research before deciding whether to regulate the contaminant, particularly about how much perchlorate humans receive from foods. A new Food and Drug Administration study from January, for example, discovered perchlorate in three-quarters of the 285 common foods and beverages researchers tested.

 

But the fact that perchlorate shows up in food does not limit the threat from contaminated water. Reducing the amount of perchlorate in the water supply can only help lower health risks.

 

And the EPA's desire for additional study sounds like an argument for delay -- a suspicion bolstered by the agency's record. The GAO reported last month that the EPA has taken a decade so far to reassess the risks of trichloroethylene, a degreasing solvent and carcinogen. The agency now says it should decide on adjusting the drinking water standard for the chemical by 2010.

 

But trichloroethylene also shows why a federal standard matters. The GAO notes that the EPA's establishment of a standard for that chemical in 1989 spurred widespread cleanup efforts, particularly at defense installations.

 

A national benchmark offers a uniform approach and the regulatory muscle of the federal government. States can impose their own rules, but federal regulations carry far more weight with polluters. And the federal government has been the main customer for perchlorate.

 

The EPA's dawdling on perchlorate has to end. Congress should not have to prod the nation's environmental watchdog into protective action. #

http://www.pe.com/localnews/opinion/editorials/stories/PE_OpEd_Opinion_D_op_09_ed_perchlorate1.366ac24.html

 

 

Water Shortage Concerns: City Contemplates Going From Toilet to Tap: Tuscon residents may soon be drinking treated wastewater as part of a growing national trend to offset diminishing freshwater sources.

Natural News 5/8/08

By Barbara L. Minton

 

Faced with increasing demand for water, Tucson Water Company has recommended that the city eventually use its growing stream of sewage to augment its drinking water. Using a procedure known as the Fountain Valley process, Tucson Water could completely close the gap that will emerge in the coming decades between Tucson's demand and supply.

 

"You could offset it all" with treated water, says Tucson Water Director David Modeer in an article by B. Poole in the Tucson Citizen. Treated sewage is much cleaner than what most Tucson citizens are drinking now, called the Clearwater blend of Avra Valley ground water and Colorado River water. The river contains chemically treated wastewater from cities upstream, along with traces of chemicals, hormones and drugs that a system such as Orange County's would remove.

 

The Fountain Valley process involves chemical treatment, filtering, more filtering, radiation zapping, and more chemical treatment. It yields water that is nearly distilled, which is then injected into the underground water supply. Orange County has been using the process since January, and its success could serve as a road map to Tucson's future.

 

Even Tucson's most vocal critic of drinking wastewater can't deny that water put through the Fountain Valley process is clean. "Given enough money, you can treat water to make it pure -- more pure than what we're drinking now, for sure," said former state legislator John Kromko, who last year spearheaded an effort to ban the use of wastewater in drinking water.

 

As people from south of the border flood into California and Arizona, the Orange County Sanitation District realized growth would soon force it to build a new pipe to push treated sewage into the ocean five miles offshore. While environmentalists watched and construction costs swelled, the utility sought a partnership with the water district.

 

The partners began designing a treatment plant that would keep sewer outflow to a minimum, save money, and decrease dependence on imported water. Like Tucson's effluent, more than half of which is dumped into the Santa Cruz River, the Orange County wastewater was flowing out of the district unused.

 

"We're taking a source of water that would otherwise be wasted to the ocean," said Mike Markus, Orange County District General Manager.

 

In order to end up with water that is more pure than other water the district uses, it is first chemically treated by the sanitation district. Then large particles are filtered out and the water district pushes the water through membranes to get rid of all but the smallest molecules. Then it is sanitized with ultraviolet radiation and hydrogen peroxide.

 

Modeer claims the purity of Orange County water could be achieved for Tucson. "Water is water. Water is just H2O, and we can get it down to just H20 ... You can take everything out, then you can add back what you want."

 

Kromko, whose proposed ban on the use of treated wastewater in the drinking water supply was rejected by voters, does not dispute that. But he fears such a plant would encourage growth, which would make Tucson more vulnerable to drought and resulting shortages from the Colorado River.

 

But some see growth as actually being the source of the water. By 2030, if the city's population projections hold true, Tucson will own about 20 billion gallons of effluent per year. About a third of that would be used on park, school and golf course turf. The rest would be available to use as drinking water -- enough for about 150,000 families.

 

Although some people express disgust at the thought of drinking treated effluent, many others have been drinking it all their lives. In most cities along America's rivers, wastewater is chemically treated, then returned to the rivers to be used as drinking water downstream. This treatment leaves behind traces of chemicals and drugs that eventually wind up in the drinking water.

 

Virtually every major waterway in the nation contains treated effluent.

 

For Tucson, the City Council, not the public, will decide whether to blend treated effluent with drinking water, although the decision remains some years away.

 

City Councilman Steve Leal sees "the only reason you would need that plant is to serve people who don't live here yet." The cost would be substantial. The cost of the Orange County plant was $490 million.

 

Getting past the "ick factor" is also seen as necessary. The Orange County district faced little public objection, possibly because of its carefully laid plans to get its elected board behind the effort.

 

A similar effort could be done in Tucson, says Modeer. "We went to the moon, we can do this, too. I think the general public is beginning to understand that."#

http://www.alternet.org/water/84866