Winterizing  your water softener or large filter

If you keep your water softener or filter in the basement of an occupied home, you normally don’t need to worry about winterizing it.

However, if the softener or filter is an unheated garage, a vacation home that’s closed down for the winter, or a home that’s going to be left vacant during an extended winter vacation, you need to take precautions against freezing.

Insulating jacket for softener or filter tank.

If you live in a milder climate, where the weather doesn’t get extremely cold, insulating your pipes and tanks should be enough to protect your system during the winter. You can purchase pipe insulation wrap at any home improvement store. Heat tape or electric pipe heating cables for the water lines are also a good idea.

The tall tank needs protection from freezing; the shorter brine tank, probably not.

Some homeowners build an insulated box around the main media tank. You can also purchase plumbing insulation in sheets, or wrap an insulation blanket around the tank. There are even special jackets designed for water softener and filter tanks, or water heat insulation jackets can be modified to do the job.

Because of the salt saturation, your softener’s brine tank is only likely to freeze in very cold climates where temperatures stay above zero.  After all, it has to get really cold for the ocean to freeze.

If you are using your water softener year round, the most important thing is to keep it warm enough to prevent freezing, which is why a space heater in your garage or an other unheated space can help. Remember, you only need to keep the temperature above 32 degrees Fahrenheit.

Running water will also prevent freezing. If you are only going to be away for a few days, you could leave a faucet running at a slow trickle to keep things moving in the pipes.  Although not a cure-all, this will at times prevent hard freezing and bursting from freezing pipes.

Draining and Disconnecting

If you do not plan on using your water softener during the winter, and the heat in your residence will be turned off during that time, there are specific steps you should follow to disconnect, drain, and store your system.

It is recommended that you drain the tanks. If there’s no water in the tanks, they can’t freeze.

Probably the easiest way to do this is to put the softener or filter into bypass mode to isolate it from your house plumbing, then disconnect the it physically from the bypass valve so that the control valve can be screwed off the top of the tank.

With the riser exposed, you can use a 3/8″ tube inserted into the open riser to siphon the water out of the tank. You should be able to get almost all the water out of the tank. Although the water in the brine tank probably won’t freeze, it’s a good idea to dip out most of the water that isn’t actually covered by salt.

Unplug the control valve.

With all the water out of the tank, the filter or softener may actually be light enough to move to a warmer area. If it’s too heavy, leave it: it should be safe.

People with remove cabins who shut down seasonally might find it worthwhile to invest in a softener or filter built in a special “bottom drain” tank that makes the job of winterizing easy.  These tanks can be drained completely without removal of the control valve or going to the trouble of siphoning.

We are swimming in a sea of chemicals too numerous to count

by Gene Franks

Since around 1980, when I first started paying attention to such things, the estimated number of different chemicals that find their way into our drinking water supplies keeps going up.  This is to be expected.  What we should really be concerned about is that our ability to monitor and regulate this onslaught of chemicals has not kept pace.

When the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) became law in 1976 there were estimated to be about 62,000 chemicals in commerce. Under the provisions of the law, these 62,000 chemicals were assumed to be safe unless the newly formed EPA found that they posed an “unreasonable risk.” How many of these has the EPA studied since 1976?  About 200.  How may has it banned? Five.  That’s five. With such oppressive over-regulation, it’s no wonder there are constant cries to reign in the EPA.

Now the estimated total has grown to 85,000 chemicals. Can anyone remember when the EPA last banned a chemical?

The following is excerpted, loosely, from an outstanding article by Peter S. Cartwright.  We hope you’ll follow the link and read the full article with the author’s documentation. The italicized text is Mr. Cartwright’s.

Every time water goes down the drain, whether to a sewer, septic system, storm drain or wherever, it carries contaminants with it, which usually end up in someone’s drinking water. Included are unmetabolized pharmaceuticals, chemicals and particles from hand and face washing, bathing, laundry, the toilet—from virtually any and all human activity. The contaminants are in tiny concentrations, but from many thousands of sources and, as our use of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) increases, our drinking water is becoming more contaminated.

The number of chemicals that surround us has grown beyond our comprehension.  Mr. Cartwright says:

Globally, we now produce more than 85,000 different chemicals, many of which end up in our drinking water. Chemicals are used to manufacture 96 percent of consumer products; the average adult uses nine products per day containing 126 different chemicals.  Fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and antibiotics are all also used in agriculture and animal husbandry operations. Whether from hand washing, bathing, showering, laundry, dishwashing, toilet use—no matter for what purpose we use water, it carries contaminants down the drain. If this water enters a municipal wastewater treatment system, it ultimately ends up in a body of water (lake, river, etc.), which often becomes a source of drinking water. If the wastewater is directed into a septic system, the treated water percolates into the earth, where it usually enters an aquifer or other water supply. Weather events generating runoff from lawn and agricultural surfaces also contribute to this contamination. It’s a fact of life: virtually every time water goes down the drain, it is carrying some contaminants that end up in someone’s drinking water.

Our drug habit, our consumption of “pharmaceuticals,” has gone far past what can be called epidemic proportions. A study in our area, North Texas, a few years ago demonstrated that estrogen spikes in our wastewater mirror the schedule of our universities: when school is in session, estrogen from birth control chemicals peed into the water goes up sharply.

Many of the pharmaceutical products we ingest are not completely metabolized, pass through the body and contribute to [water] contamination.  America is the largest pill-popping nation in the world, with 70 percent of us taking one prescription a day, 50 percent taking two and 25 percent five or more per day. Additionally, because people are living longer, more pharmaceuticals are consumed and more end up in the water. Opioid addiction has become a crisis. In the US alone, in 2016, almost 4.5 billion medical prescriptions were issued. Other sources of contaminants include food, toothpaste, artificial sweeteners, caffeine, vitamins, as well as cosmetics, lotion, sunscreen, perfume, deodorant—the list goes on and on.

It would be foolish to assume that such vast chemical exposure poses no health risk to humans, although specific cause/effect relationships between chemicals and health are extremely hard to “prove.” Although Americans’ blood levels of glyphosate (RoundUp) keeps going up, singling out the popular herbicide as a “cause” of any specific human ailment has eluded us.

Mr. Cartwright cites plenty of “anecdotal evidence,” however.

A 2008 Canadian study showed that

In 20 industrialized nations, the birthrate for boys has declined every year for the past 30 years. There has been a 200-percent increase in male sex organ abnormalities over the last 20 years. The average sperm count of North American college students has dropped by over 50 percent in the last 50 years. Up to 85 percent of the sperm in healthy males contains damaged DNA. Over the last 50 years, there has been a 300-percent increase in testicular cancer. For many years, there have been reports of feminization in fish and amphibians, as well as documented genitalia deformities in such diverse animal populations as bears, panthers, sea lions, whales, birds, alligators and others. Between 1999 and 2003, in a population of Chippewa aboriginal peoples in southwestern Ontario, Canada, the birth ratio of boys to girls declined from roughly 50/50 to 33/67.

On chemicals known as endocrine disrupters (EDCs) alone there has been extensive research which clearly reveals the association of exposure to EDCS and human disease.  Mr. Cartwright quotes the journal Endocrine Reviews:

“Whether low doses of EDCs influence certain human disorders is no longer conjecture, because epidemiological studies show that environmental exposures to EDCs are associated with human diseases and disabilities.” A follow-up review in 2015 contains the statement: “It simply is not reasonable to assume a chemical is safe until proven otherwise. Clearly, not all chemicals are EDCs, but substantial information needs to be provided before inclusion of a new compound in a food-storage product, a water bottle, health and beauty products or a household product.

A significant hindrance to establishing clear cause/effect relationships with chemicals is that EDCs can have even “transgenerational effects.”  It is not easy to trace a person’s ailments back to chemical exposure to his or her grandfather.

Transgenerational effects of EDCs mean that even if a chemical is removed from use, its imprints on the exposed individual’s DNA may persist for generations and possibly forever. 

Other common chemicals we are regularly exposed to via drinking water include disinfectants and additives like fluoride.

Chlorine, the common water disinfectant used in municipal drinking water treatment plants can chemically react with some PPCPs and produce DBPs, a class of which trihalomethanes (THMs)contains chemicals known to cause cancer. In recognition of this, US EPA has established a maximum limit for THM compounds, listed in the Safe Drinking Water Act. Many municipalities are adding ammonia to chlorine to produce chloramines, which do not generate dangerous DBPs. The formation of these compounds is an example of the complex chemistry associated with PPCP contamination.

Then there are the “emerging contaminants” known as PFAS.

In addition, fluorine-based chemical contamination of aquifers has become a major issue in many areas. Under the general acronym, PFAS (poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances), they are major components of firefighting foam, Teflon^® and Scotchgard^® products, coatings on carpeting, clothing, fast-food wrappers and many other consumer products. PFAS exposure has been linked to cancer, obesity, immune system suppression and endocrine system disruption.

Today there are multiple agencies, including the EPA, the CDC, the US Dept. of Health and Human Services, facing the seemingly hopeless task of keeping up with and reporting on the effects of chemicals on the US population. The EPA, for example, publishes a report every two years. The most recent (2017) report included data on 308 chemicals. Let’s see–308 of how many? 85,000.  Obviously, chemicals are being put into the environment a lot faster than regulators can regulate them.

Nevertheless, there is, as Mr. Cartwright notes, “a continuous stream of news releases on credible scientific studies that address links between common household chemicals and various health effects.”  So many that we can’t keep up with them.

Here are a few:

•  In a 2014 study at Columbia University, two chemicals found in such products as lipstick, hairspray, nail polish, dryer sheets and vinyl fabrics (phthalates: suspected EDCs) lowered the IQ of children born to mothers exposed to them.

•  A recent Virginia Tech study has found a connection between quaternary ammonium compounds (quats) found in cleaners, laundry detergent, fabric softener, shampoo, conditioner and eye drops, and birth defects in laboratory rodents.

•  Again, common household products are implicated in a Washington University in St. Louis study that linked them with ovarian function, resulting in women experiencing menopause two to four years earlier than normal.

It is very important to underscore the fact that, so far, there is no proven link between these trace contaminants and human health. Although many scientific studies are underway, there is lack of conclusive proof that PPCPs are harmful. On the other hand, with so many different chemicals in our drinking water (in this writer’s opinion), it is only a matter of time before a health risk is identified.

Mr. Cartwright’s research points to many unanswered questions involving the relationship of waterborne chemicals with cancer, autism, ADHD, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, allergies and more.  He suggests that the most vulnerable populations are babies, the elderly, pregnant women, and adults with compromised immune systems. It is unclear if the most dangerous chemicals are those that bioaccumulate in the body or those that break down in the body. And he asks what is probably the most persistent and the most difficult questions: Are there combinations of chemicals that present greater risks than individual chemicals and do they react with each other to produce other dangerous compounds?

Reference: Water Conditioning and Purification Magazine. 

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

See also on the Gazette’s site: Emerging contaminants are emerging too fast for regulators.

Easy Repair for Fleck 5600 Controls: Pistons, Seals, and Spacers

Replacing seals and spacers in the Fleck 5600 control valve for water softeners and filters is a fairly easy “do it yourself” job that can save you the expense of professional service and the inconvenience of waiting for repair to be done.

Seals,  spacers, and pistons are the control valve parts that eventually need replacement.  They may wear out in a few months or last for many years, their longevity depending mainly on the use the filter or softener gets. Logically, the most fragile valve parts will need more frequent replacement on a well-water iron filter than on a chlorine removal filter running on clean city water,

Whatever the usage, the common symptoms of piston and seal/spacer problems are the control valve’s inability to complete the regeneration cycle because it hangs up in backwash or rinse position. If the filter runs water to drain when it should be in service position and running water only to the home, the problem is almost always seals and spacers. This is a serious problem that not only wastes water and energy, but for well users excess water drain to leach fields and septic systems and lead to very expensive repairs.

Although seals, spacers and piston are inner parts of the control valve, they’re easy to get to and the repair can in most cases be done without removing the control unit from the filter or softener.

Parts needed for 5600 Seal, Spacer, Piston replacement for a 5600 filter or softener control are

FL537 — 5600 Filter Piston, Standard Timer Unit.

FL516 — 5600 Softener Piston, Standard Timer and Electromechanical Meter (Econominder) Unit.

FL539 — 5600 Piston all SXT Units, Softeners and Filters, Including AIO Filters.

FL517 – 5600 Seal and Spacer Kit, all 5600 units.

Mike’s Easy Ten-Step Method for Replacing Piston, Seals and Spacers in 5600 Filters and Softeners

For a parts list and illustration, see pp. 16.-17 of the 5600 Service Manual.

1. Turn off the incoming water and relieve pressure by putting the unit in bypass or by opening a faucet downstream. If the unit has a bypass valve, you can simply put it in bypass. If there is a meter, pull out the cable to disconnect it.

2. Remove the back cover of the control valve.

3. Remove the screw and washer from the drive yoke, then remove the timer mounting screws and the entire timer assembly will lift off easily. Remove the end plug retainer plate.

4. Pull upward on piston yoke to remove the piston from the valve.

5. If you are replacing only the seals and spacers, or the seals and spacers as well as the piston, remove the seals and spacers at this time.  Usually you can pull them out with your fingers, but in dirty filters some brute force may be needed. A screwdriver is a good tool. To replace the seals and spacers, the order is seal, spacer, seal, spacer, etc. Both the top and bottom items will be seals.

6. When the seals and spacers are either inspected or replaced, push the piston into the valve by means of the end plug. Twist the yoke carefully in a CLOCKWISE direction to align it properly with the drive gear.

7. Replace the end plug retainer plate.

8. Replace the timer on top of the valve, making sure that the drive pin engages the slot in the drive yoke. Rotate the control knob if necessary.

9. Replace the timer mounting screws and the screw and washer in the drive yoke.

10. Return the valve to service and check for leaks.

A note about You Tube videos.  There are several good “how to” videos available most of the time that can be found with a simple search. Keep in mind that not all will be about the valve that you have. For example, if you have a 5600 filter, ignore instructions about meters, brine valves, and injectors. Seal and spacer replacement is the same on all 5600 controls.

What is your well’s flow rate capability?

The flow rate capability of your well should be measured accurately because many backwashing water filters require a flow rate that is adequate to keep the media clean. Timing how long it takes to fill up a measured bucket is an inaccurate method of attaining flow rates unless you have a “constant pressure” well that delivers water at a more or less fixed rate.  For conventional pressure tank wells, the single-shot bucket method is not accurate.

The proper well water flow rate is determined by counting the gallons drawn down and the time between cut in and cut off cycle of the well pump. To do this, you’ll need some kind of timing device, like a stop watch, plus a container of known size to catch water in.

1. Allow the well pump to build to full pressure, the shut off the main water valve to the building to assure that no water is being used.
2.  Then, open a spigot below the pressure tank, capture the water, and measure the number of gallons drawn down from the pressure tank until the well pump turns on. You can measure in a small bucket, because it’s OK to turn the water off while the bucket is being empties.
3. When the pump turns on, immediately close the spigot and time the period it takes for the well pump to recover, that is, see how much time lapses between when the pump turns on and when it turns off.

When you have this information, the formula for determining the flow rate is gallons drawn down that were measured above, divided by the seconds required for recovery, then multiplied by 60. (Gallons / Seconds) x 60 = Gallons per Minute (gpm) flow. For example, if 16 gallons are drawn down and it takes 90 seconds to build pressure back up, then: 16 divided by 90 = .177. Consequently, .177 x 60 = 10.6 gallons per minute flow rate.

What you are calculating is the sustained flow rate of the well–the gpm rate that the well can put out over the time necessary to backwash a filter. This can differ considerably from the “first bucket out” rate taken when the pressure tank is full.

Backwashing filters need sustained flow for several minutes to complete their cycle, and a filter should not be installed on a well that will not supply enough gpm flow to backwash it.

To Rake or Not To Rake

by Gene Franks

October’s leaves were dancing ’round

like angels dressed in robes of Red and Gold

but November’s come and gone now

and they’re lying in the gutter out along the road

They’re gonna make their way out to the ditch or someday to the sea,

they’ll get to where they’re going without the help of you or me

and if each life is just a grain of sand

I’m telling you man, this grain of sand is mine.

Iris DeMent, “The Way I Should.”

Serious water issues from cyanobacterial blooms to dead spots in the ocean are regularly blamed on excessive nutrients, specifically nitrogen and phosphorous, that humans put into the water. These result mainly from fertilizers, animal manure (both from feedlots and companion animals), and overflows from sewage treatment plants.

But now comes a report by the U.S. Geological Survey telling us that failure to remove leaves from areas where they can be swept into stormwater collection systems can spike stormwater with phosphorus and nitrogen and greatly compromise water quality.  In fact, leaf removal studies performed in Madison, WI, seemed to show that, at least during the time of year when leaves are most abundant,  “. . .timely leaf removal reduced total phosphorous loads by 84 percent and nitrogen loads by 74 percent.” The conclusion was that phosphorous in wastewater could be greatly reduced if the city would collect leaves and clean streets weekly and before “rain events” between early September and mid-November.

Clearly, the Madison experiment is about big-time leaf harvesting by city crews, not about requiring individual tree owners to clean up after their trees the way that pet owners are now supposed to pick up after their dogs.  At least, as a confirmed non-raker, that’s what I hope it means.

The issue seems to be that, as one writer puts it, “. . .when water managers have run out of other levers to pull, [leaf removal] is an effort that should be prioritized.” I would put it more bluntly: Since we can’t get profit-driven corporate farmers to adopt saner and more earth-friendly growing methods, and we can’t expect people to cut back on the meat and dairy diet that is burying us in animal feces, and we can’t ask people to give up their pets, and since we certainly can’t ask people to pay a bit more for water or to agree to increase their taxes so that our ancient sewage treatment plants can be upgraded, we should concentrate our efforts on picking up leaves.

While we have to applaud any effort to keep water clean, leaf management seems like a pretty tricky business.  For example, if leaf collecting becomes a national nutrient reduction strategy, what are we going to do with all the leaves we collect? Landfills are already bulging. Are we going to inject them into deep wells, like fracking waste, or haul them to leaf disposal sites in the desert? Will we eventually try to genetically engineer leafless trees, or trees whose leaves are permanently attached?

Keeping the streets clean is an essential part of wastewater management. It is certainly better to sweep up contaminants before they get into the water than to remove them from the water later. But on the broader leaf issue, I’m still a non-raker. As Iris DeMent says in her great anthem to personal freedom, leaves should be left to “get to where they’re going without the help of you and me.”

So there!

Reference: The Fall of Water Quality: Blame It on the Leaves.

See also: Street Sweepers Clean More Than the Streets.

By Peter Chawaga

Well before Hurricane Harvey brought torrential winds and stormwater into Houston, the city had a reputation for ambitious construction and sprawling development.

In a project that demonstrates this city’s spirit, Houston will soon be home to the world’s largest water purification facility, which broke ground earlier this month.

“The Northeast Water Purification Plant Expansion is currently the largest water treatment project on the planet — not just in the State of Texas, not just in the United States, but on the planet,” said Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner, according to the Houston Chronicle. “Can you imagine this plant just a couple of weeks ago was submerged under water, yet we are still here today?”

The city invested nearly $1.5 billion in the project, which includes the building of a high service pump station, ground storage tanks, and treatment facilities. It is expected to increase treated water capacity in the area to 320 MGD.

“The project includes the design and construction of a new raw water facility, which includes an advanced three-level intake, pumping, and conveyance to withdraw water from Lake Houston and deliver it through two new 108” pipelines to the treatment facilities located about 1.5 miles from Lake Houston,” per Construction Equipment. “The undertaking involves moving water three miles over a ridge and into a 23-mile canal that will feed Lake Houston, then pumped through 17 miles of pipe large enough to drive a car through.”

The ambitious project is expected to meet a growing need for clean drinking water in the area.

“The Greater Houston Water Department says that by 2025, surface water — rather than groundwater — must supply at least 60 percent of the water used by the area,” Construction Equipment reported. “That percentage will rise to 80 percent by 2035. The reason is that with the rapid expansion of the Houston area, groundwater being pumped in Harris, Galveston, and Fort Bend counties has reached a point where the ground has sunk several feet, causing flooding. Some wells in the area have hit salty water and other have hit water that smells like sulfur.”

The project is expected to be complete by 2024.

Source: Water Online.

Tap Water Problems Found To Be More Prevalent In Poor, Minority Communities

by Sara Jerome

Tap water problems and shoddy water infrastructure are rampant in poor African-American communities, according to a report published by the Center for Public Integrity.

Campti, LA, is one example.

“Like many poor African-American communities, Campti’s poverty is a significant impediment to making crucial improvements to the town’s infrastructure — including its old water system,” the report said.

More than half of Campti’s population lives in poverty, and the median income is under $16,000 the report said.

Lifelong resident Leroy Hayes said the water often smells like bleach or takes on a brown hue.

“The water system in Campti is more than 50 years old, according to an audit from the Louisiana legislative auditor. Near the end of 2016, the water tank sprang several holes, some of which were temporarily plugged with sticks. A new tank was built in March, but residents still don’t trust that the water is safe,” the report said.

Former Campti Mayor Judy Daniels explained that local water problems “get worse after a storm or power outage because the water pump does not have a backup generator,” the report paraphrased.

Uniontown, AL, is another example.

“Black residents blame a swell of gastrointestinal complications on the waste from a nearby catfish farm they say pollutes their drinking water. In parts of North Carolina, impoverished African-Americans sometimes rely on contaminated wells for drinking water — though public water systems run just a few feet from their homes,” the report said.

Jacqueline Patterson, the director of the NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Program, said communities of color are “disproportionately affected by polluting industries because they are more likely to be located near low-income neighborhoods.”

The recent report by News21 noted that water violations occur at systems in every part of the country. But there are clean patterns governing which areas are hardest hit, the report said.

“Drinking water quality is often dependent on the wealth and racial makeup of communities, according to News21’s analysis. Small, poor communities and neglected urban areas are sometimes left to fend for themselves with little help from state and federal governments,” the report said.

Manuel Teodoro, a researcher at Texas A&M University, cited a “bias” when it comes to water safety.

“These are not isolated incidences, the Flints of the world or the Corpus Christis or the East Chicagos,” Teodoro said. “These incidents are getting media attention in a way that they didn’t a few years ago, but the patterns that we see in the data suggest that problems with drinking water quality are not just randomly distributed in the population — that there is a systemic bias out there.”

The crisis in Flint, MI, helped highlight the problem of lead contamination. Mother Jones reported that the problem is a particular threat to minority communities.

“Economically and politically vulnerable black and Hispanic children, many of whom inhabit dilapidated older housing, still suffer disproportionately from the devastating effects of the toxin. This is the meaning of institutional racism in action today,” the report said.

Source: WaterOnline.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Carbon Filters Galore

We just counted.  In the “Cartridge Menu” at purewaterproducts.com there are more than fifty separate carbon filter cartridges, and that’s just in the four standard sizes.  These range from carbon blocks to granular carbons, many with specialty additives like calcite and KDF.  There are coconut shell carbons, bituminous carbons, and lignite carbons; there are carbon filters enhanced to remove lead and cysts, to prevent scale buildup, to inhibit bacterial growth, to remove fluoride, to reduce tannins, to raise pH. There are carbon filters that target VOCs and others that offer fantastically long and effective chlorine reduction.

In addition, there are “proprietary” carbon filters for a number of brands (Microline, Hydrotech, or example), inline carbons (from Pentair and Omnipure), aftermarket knock-offs (Multipure), and several ceramic candles with carbon cores.

Filter carbon is the central core of most modern water filtration systems. For some 90% of the water contaminants monitored by the EPA, carbon filtration is the preferred treatment. We hope you’ll look over our carbon collection. Our “Cartridge Menu” offers extensive information on all the carbon filters that we sell, including pictures, performance summaries, and links to manufacturers’ brochures.

Dams, reservoirs, canals and safe drinking water matter for absolutely everyone

By Sean W. Fleming

Gazette’s Introductory Note: We strongly support President Trump’s frequently stated plan to spend heavily on national infrastructure. Nothing could be more important, and such a project is long overdue. We’re way behind on fixing bridges, pipes,  and drainage networks. There are estimated to be over 55,000 US bridges that are badly in need of repair or replacement. We hope that these items can take precedence over walls and jails. The Scientific American article that follows suggests some directions that the president’s plan could take.

What implications will Trump administration policies have for America’s rivers?

When I was first asked this, I felt like a school kid caught daydreaming in class by the teacher. It was during the Q&A following a public talk I’d given at the Smithsonian a few months ago on the science of rivers, and I didn’t have a ready answer. I’m a science geek, not a policy wonk. The talk had been about things like why rivers run where they do, how the same river can experience drought one year and spill its banks the next, and how the amazing universality of mathematics leads to the same equations being used for operational flood forecasting and Wall Street derivative pricing models.

I also felt wary about speaking to political issues on behalf of all science, especially at a time when folks are unusually polarized, sensitive, and ornery; the credibility and influence that science holds with leaders and the public relies on scientists being seen as neutral third-party technical experts. But then again, water resource science isn’t quantum loop gravity. We’re practical people engaged in a practical science, and it’s not like my colleagues and I never contemplated the intersection between hydrologic science and society.

So I offered the audience this fundamental, if vague, response: if we want to maintain forward momentum irrespective of whichever party wins any given election, it’s important we build a wide base of support by rejecting the increasingly common—and false—notion that there can only be two ways of viewing the world, one which is protective of water, rivers, and the environment, and the other not.

I also posited that this should not be too hard to accomplish, because while there are different ideas on how to best manage water, just about everyone agrees it’s important, regardless of whether you live in the city or the country, on the coasts or in the interior of the continent, in a blue state or a red state.

But if I was asked that question again today, I’d add this key corollary: the Trump administration;s drive to renew America’s infrastructure offers powerful, if perhaps unexpected, synergies with pushing water resource science forward. At first glance, infrastructure renewal may seem less about science and more about the tough but wise decision to allocate funds for long-term investments that in most years don’t seem like an immediate priority. But if we’re going to repair America’s increasingly rickety water infrastructure, let’s do it right, making focused investments in the applied scientific R&D needed to ensure a new generation of infrastructure is designed to support the needs of the American people and the American economy for another hundred years.

Rivers and their infrastructure, like dams, reservoirs, and canals, matter for absolutely everyone. Examples range from the obvious to the surprising. Rivers deliver drinking water, irrigation water for growing food and brewing beer, and the large amounts of water required for industrial processes ranging from building cars to building computers. Rivers drive hydroelectric turbines, keeping the lights on and the economy in motion. Flood control infrastructure keeps us safe, and healthy rivers generate recreational, tourism, and fisheries dollars.

Rivers provided the transportation pathways by which early America was explored and through which it developed its own unique culture: think of the Lewis and Clark expedition, Mississippi gambling steamboats, and Huckleberry Finn. Even victory in WWII and the ensuing Cold War owed much to river infrastructure: aluminum used to build fighting aircraft, and uranium and plutonium in the first atomic bombs at White Sands and over Imperial Japan and subsequently in the growing US nuclear arsenal, were produced using copious hydroelectric power generated by Columbia River dams in the west and the Tennessee Valley Authority in the east. Harnessing and effectively managing water has been, and will continue to be, central to the economy, defense, and psyche of America.

While tremendous technical prowess and monetary investments went into our current water systems when they were first built–think of marvels like the Hoover Dam–today, much of our water infrastructure is old and either failing or otherwise not performing at the level America requires in the 21st century. The Oroville Dam incident and associated evacuation last winter is a potent reminder. There are many other examples: silting up and end-of-design-life for many dams nationwide; difficulties with fish passage and aquatic habitat, with implications to ecological health and therefore recreation, tourism, and commercial fisheries dollars; the ongoing saga of flooding in New Orleans, tied in part to Mississippi flows and the sometimes controversial control structures on it; and above all, the insufficient capacity to match the water and power needs of growing populations and economies, especially in the west. Cleary, renewing America’s rivers is a fantastic direction for the infrastructure investments President Trump wants to make.

To do this right, we need not only concrete and pipe but also a focused, goal-oriented investment in developing the science and engineering knowledge needed to ensure these rejuvenated systems do their job effectively and safely for a long time to come. We need to better understand both the natural and human-induced hydroclimatic variability of river systems so that infrastructure and associated decision support systems can be designed to better handle both flood and drought. We need to develop and test new principles for water infrastructure and river management that return the natural ecological functioning so important for tourism, fishing, and other industries. We need to discover new approaches that minimize the future maintenance budgets required for that infrastructure, and to invest in technologies that contribute to water conservation, ranging from fixing and updating leaky water distribution lines to promoting water-efficient manufacturing and agricultural processes.

We must enhance flood and water supply forecasting systems to further improve the efficiency of reservoir planning and management. Diversify the water portfolio; innovative work with desalinization plants and groundwater production from brine aquifers in California and Texas may provide an example. Ensure that every city in America has the infrastructure it needs to provide its citizens with a clean and safe drinking water supply; don’t let Flint happen again. And following the established pattern of history-making federal government-led successes, from the Apollo program to winning the Cold War, spread these investments in innovation across organizations and sectors, including academia, government, NGOs, and the private sector.

So, what will be the implications of the new administration for America’s rivers? That depends. If President Trump plays his cards right with his planned infrastructure investments, he could leave a tremendously positive long-term legacy around rivers, science and the economy.

Source: Scientific American.