Embalmers Used to Pump Corpses Full of Arsenic.  Now It Is Turning Up In Groundwater.

From the time of the Civil War to the first decade of the 20th century, arsenic was the main ingredient of embalming fluids in the United States.  Arsenic does not degrade, ever, into harmless by-products, so the burial practices of the end of the 19th century and first years of the 20th have left us with significant environmental hazards.

To be clear, we aren’t talking about minute amounts of arsenic.  Embalmers often had their own special fluid blend, but they usually used from as little as four ounces to as much as 12 pounds of arsenic per body.

As caskets downgrade, as they do eventually, the arsenic is picked up by water moving downward and washed into the soil or the groundwater.

Read more about old cemeteries, arsenic, and water quality.

 

Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Cromium, Lead, Mercury, Selenium, Silver and Benzene Found in the Panola-Bethany Public Water Supply

 Adapted from an article by David Hudson in the Panola Watchman.

Editor’s Note:  We’re including almost all of Mr. Hudson’s informative article because it gives a very good explanation of  the shoddy  disposal system for what oil companies like to call “salt water.” Keep in mind as you read that the nation–the world, in fact–is now salted with neglected or abandoned salt water wells just waiting to dump their contents into groundwater.  –Hardly Waite.

New Perchlorate Method Uses Chemical to Promote Ionic Bonding

According to Central Michigan University,  faculty member Anja Mueller has invented a method to filter 300 times more perchlorates from water than typical consumer filters currently on the market. The technology, recently licensed by CMU, is being developed into products that will be easy to install and can be utilized by popular home purification methods.

Ten percent of US drinking water is known to contain perchlorates.  Perchlorate is difficult to remove because it is highly soluble and it does not attach to mineral surfaces.  Exposure to perchlorates is extremely dangerous to pregnant women, fetuses and infants. It has been linked to the disruption of thyroid hormone, leading to brain development issues and contributing to cancer.

Conventional perchlorate reduction is done by carbon filtration or anion exchange, and NSF certifies reverse osmosis for perchlorate reduction.  It is unclear how the new technology will be superior, although a spokesman for the university states,  “This technology is so different in what it does to remove contaminates [sic] it’s poised to change the entire water filtration market.”

We’ll see about that.

The full story.

 

Tubifex Worms Living at the Bald Knob, AR Waste Water Plant Have Worn Out Their Welcome

 

Worms normally used as fish bait have found their way into the wastewater treatment plant in Bald Knob, AR and they have caused major issues in their new

home. The Tubifex worms pose no safety risk to the public, but they clump together in big balls and get in the way.

The only way to get rid of the worms is to remove them physically, which is a tedious and costly process. The plant has had to drain a million gallons of water in the effort to get rid of the worms.

More about the Bald Knob worm infestation.

Editorial Note.  The piece below is veteran Gazette columnist Tiger Tom’s response to yesterday’s post regarding the environmental superiority of “real” Christmas trees as compared with “fake” plastic Christmas trees. — Hardly Waite,  Editor. 

In Defense of Phony  Plastic Christmas Trees

by Tiger Tom

I’ll be quick because I’m a little ashamed to be taking time to come to the defense of a plastic Christmas tree. It’s like defending Spam, or high fructose corn syrup.

One, the guy from the wooden, bushy  Christmas tree industry in the National Geographic article refers to his trees as “real” and to the plastic trees as “fake.” What is so real about having a dead factory farmed tree in your living room? It isn’t any more a tree than the plastic one is.  A pretend tree in the living room  is a fake tree. Wood or plastic, it’s still a fake tree.

Two, the bushy fake tree advocate also leaves out things like the undisputed fact that  people often use plastic trees for many years. This changes the whole equation.  He assumes that everyone buys a plastic tree shipped from China, throws it away, then buys another just like it next December.  I confess that I actually know people who have plastic Christmas trees.  Several people.  And I don’t know any who pitch the tree at the end of the season so they can get next year’s upgraded model. A plastic tree is a plastic tree, and if you’ve got one you might as well stick with it. Next year’s won’t have a better operating system.

Three, the wooden tree argument just assumes, without showing any evidence, that it takes more water to produce a plastic fake tree than a wooden one.  I remain unconvinced.  Trees, especially young ones (and Christmas trees, let’s be frank, are murdered before they even reach adolescence), are very, very thirsty little guys.  And when you add in the re-use factor, it’s clear that the bushy tree water saving theory doesn’t hold water.

The bushy tree advocate also fails to mention that plastic trees don’t have to be made in China.  He says most of them are made in China.  I frankly don’t give a flip where they’re made, but if having the manufacturing pollution and water consumption in the US rather than China is really important to us, perhaps a Made In USA tree could capture the market. And if you made it out of recycled plastic, it would be a sure winner. Or who says fake trees have to be made of PVC?  Why not old automobile tires or recycled waffle irons?

The big hole in the bushy tree argument, though, is that it assumes the non-existence of the best environmental and water-saving choice of all–not having a Christmas tree. There’s not a hint in the article that a person could get by in our civilization without a Christmas tree. It’s either a plastic tree or a bushy tree.  It’s like saying it’s good to kick your dog because it’s better than kicking your sister.

Did Jesus’ family have a Christmas tree?  Of course not. It was actually a 16th century German (probably one who owned a lot of scrubby useless trees that he needed to get rid of) who invented the Christmas tree. Since that time the whole of western civilization thinks it has to rush to the Christmas tree lot as soon as the merchants start ringing the bells.

I, Tiger Tom, say Bah, Humbug!  Show some class.  Skip the fake indoor forest altogether, or decorate your potted Aloe Vera plant.

 Real Christmas Trees are Second Only to No-Tree-at-All

Fake Christmas trees might be convenient and seem environmentally beneficial at first glance, but their environmental costs—measured in greenhouse gas emissions and landfill space—far outweigh their benefits.--National Geographic.

The environmental superiority of real Christmas trees is an accepted fact except among the sellers of artificial trees.

Artificial trees are made from a kind of plastic called polyvinyl chloride, which is derived from petroleum and can contain lead or other harmful toxins. Furthermore, according to the U.S. Commerce Department, about 80 percent of fake trees are manufactured in China, where most electricity is generated by burning coal—one of the dirtiest fuel sources.  They come to the user on ships that burn diesel and emit noxious gasses.  Fake trees do not biodegrade.

In contrast, real trees are completely recyclable, and they are grown in the United States on thousands of farms that employ an estimated 100,000 people.

As far as water use is concerned, real trees, it is true, use lots of water, but they are usually grown in areas where water is plentiful. It is almost certain that the process of manufacturing plastic trees uses more water.  No actual figures are available to substantiate this claim.

These are only some of the many reasons that real trees are second only to no tree at all as an environmental option.

 

 

More from National Geographic

 

New Jersey’s New “Fertilizer Law” Is Designed To Protect the State’s Water

New Jersey has recently enacted a new Fertilizer Law, designed to protect waterways from becoming overly nourished.   The new law sets limits on the amount of nitrogen and phosphorus that can be used on lawns and restricts the times when fertilizer can be applied. It is considered the toughest such law  in the nation.

The amount of nitrogen that consumers can use is limited to 0.9 pounds on 1,000 square feet of ground per application, and 3.2 pounds per 1,000 square feet for the year. That is a 10 percent reduction from  the previous limit of a pound.  Professionals can apply up to a pound of nitrogen per 1,000 feet in each application, and are not to exceed 4.25 pounds for the year.

There have been difficulties for some landscapers.

Read full details NY Times.

Garden Hose Filters promote healthy worms, which work better than fertilizer.

Prozac, Effexor and Tegratol from Human Waste Can Expose Fetuses to Genetic Modification

Fish exposed to psychiatric medicines showed gene patterns similar to those found in people with autism, in a study suggesting a link between drugs that get into the human water supply and the brain development disorder.

Researchers put antidepressants Prozac and Effexor, as well as antiseizure drug Tegratol into water tanks of minnows. Tests showed that the same genes turned on in people with autism were also triggered in the fish after exposure.

The findings suggest that small amounts of psychiatric medications found in the drinking supply may be a cause of autism, the researchers said. Psychiatric drugs have been linked to autism-like symptoms in studies of rats exposed to the medicines, according to the study.

Concentrations of the drugs are found downstream from water treatment plants that process human waste that contains the medicines.  The molecules make their way into the supply downstream, where pregnant mothers who drink the water can pass the exposure to their fetuses.

More Details.

NSF Certifies Its Very First Product Under the New Flushability Standard

NSF International, the prestigious certifying agent water treatment products as well as foods and many consumer goods,  has certified the first product – SCA’s TENA ® Flushable Washcloths (adult-sized wipes) – under the NSF Flushable Consumer Products Certification Program. The NSF ‘Certified Flushable’ mark on certified TENA Flushable Washcloths helps buyers differentiate between flushable and non-flushable products by eliminating confusion.

While overall wipes usage has increased at a rate of 10 percent per year, flushable wipes only make up roughly five percent of the overall wipes category.* Yet, wastewater treatment facilities face increased challenges as a result of  non-flushable wipes products entering treatment systems through toilets, which leads to clogging and other negative effects on wastewater collection and treatment systems that can increases costs and the risk for sewer spills.

More Details

Bottleless Water Coolers for Homes and Offices

The best way to have bottled water is to get the bottle out of the picture and process the water with your own treatment unit.  Coolers are now available that provide the same delivery system as bottled water coolers but avoid the expense and hassle of buying, carrying,  and changing bottles. The savings in money and time and bother

can be exceptional.

Modern bottleless coolers can provide a variety of water temperature options, some with hot, cold and “cook” (ambient temperature) water, others with cold only, others with cold and cook only.

Part of the allure of having a bottled water delivery service, however, is not having to clean and maintain the cooler itself.  The article below, from a leading seller of bottleless coolers,  demonstrates that taking care of your cooler isn’t as hard as you thought.

How to clean a bottleless cooler, sanitize the reservoir, and change the filter

A major reason people do not switch from rented coolers to bottleless coolers is the perception of convenience. These people believe that maintaining a cooler is a skill reserved for experts and learning how to do so would be too difficult. We believe in you and your ability to clean the cooler, sanitize the reservoir, and change the filter with ease and confidence.

Cleaning the cooler and sanitizing the reservoir:

You can easily wipe down the cooler with a light bleach solution (a tablespoon of bleach per gallon of water) or you can purchase a commercial water cooler cleaning agent such as Cooler Clean ™ or H20K ™. Wipe the lid of the cooler and remove both the lid and the reservoir cover. Drain any remaining water in the reservoir through the faucets. Using a dry paper towel, wipe out the inside of the reservoir to eliminate any film. Pour the commercial cleaning agent or bleach solution into the reservoir and fill with water. Wait 15 minutes and then drain the reservoir using each faucet. Repeat if necessary. Replace the reservoir cover and lid. Allow the reservoir to refill. Drain a few cups of water from each faucet and discard. Your cooler and reservoir are now cleaned and sanitized!

Bottleless coolers can be fed by either a filter or a reverse osmosis unit, in some cases built into the cooler unit, in others installed at a remote location, such as under a nearby sink.  Servicing the treatment unit is also a relatively easy process.  RO and filter makers provide instructions.