University of Rhode Island Researcher Contributes To Study Confirming Link Between PFAS – ‘Forever Chemicals’ — In Drinking Water And Weight Gain

A University of Rhode Island researcher leads a study that confirms a direct link between certain chemicals in drinking water and human obesity – specifically that increased PFAS content in blood promotes weight gain and makes it harder to keep a lower body weight after weight loss. Philippe Grandjean, M.D., PhD., is physician who holds a research professor appointment within the URI College of Pharmacy and serves on STEEP, a special URI-led science effort helping the public grapple with manmade PFAS (per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances) pollution, including its presence in drinking water resources.

“We’ve previously shown that children with increased PFAS concentrations tend to gain weight and develop higher levels of cholesterol in the blood,” said Grandjean, a professor of environmental medicine at the University of Southern Denmark, who has researched the human health impacts of PFAS in multiple countries and populations, including children, for decades. “We now focused on adults who participated in an experimental study of five different diets in regard to weight gain. Our results add to the concern that environmental pollution may be affecting our metabolism, so that we tend to gain weight.”

For the recent study, the researchers, using STEEP-affiliated laboratories, analyzed PFAS chemicals in 381 blood samples that were already part of a randomized European Commission clinical trial in Europe focused on weight loss planning for obese adults. No matter the diet that these participants were assigned to, they gained weight if they had elevated PFAS exposures. One particular chemical, PFOA, which is commonly found in contaminated drinking water, demonstrated, more so than other PFAS pollutants, ties to obesity. Furthermore, those participants in the European study with the most PFOA in their blood were found, after a one-year follow-up, to have gained about 10 pounds more than those with low levels.

“Our study adds new evidence that being overweight isn’t just about a lack of physical activity and unhealthy eating habits – PFAS are increasingly suspected to be a contributing factor,” said Grandjean. “The PFAS exposures in the European participants are quite comparable to levels in America, so my concern is that our exposures to PFAS are making it difficult for us to avoid getting overweight.”

The study results are useful, too, for informing the ongoing work of the URI STEEP – Sources, Transport, Exposure & Effects of PFAS – Superfund Research Center, which employs research, applied science, student education and training, and outreach approaches to build community capacity for responding to PFAS pollution. PFAS, a large and decades-old family of chemicals, infiltrate many human and natural environments – they are colorless, tasteless, and odorless, and often are used to create barriers or stop liquids from seeping. The chemicals coat pizza boxes and microwave popcorn bags, nonstick cookware, and waterproof clothing, and stop stains from sinking into carpet and furniture.

The heavily used “forever chemicals” have also leached into water, from marine habitats to drinking water resources, with STEEP committing significant effort toward ensuring sound science informs public dialogue about enhancing protections for supplies. “The hard science is the main tool the government has upon which to make changes that move us closer to either lessening or removing PFAS from our water, our lives, our environments,” said Rainer Lohmann, a URI chemical oceanographer and STEEP research director. “PFAS presents a long-term challenge, but we are making steady progress.”

And increasingly, said Lohmann and Grandjean, public policy discussions at the federal and state levels are focused on determining regulatory and legislative paths forward to potentially lower PFAS levels in drinking water sources across the country. “The EPA has recently proposed binding guidelines for water contamination,” said Grandjean. “I hope that the new regulation will be successful, and now I have an additional reason to hope.”

The study appears in the current issues of Obesity, the official journal of The Obesity Society. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) funds STEEP through a Multi-project Center Grant awarded by the NIEHS Superfund Research Program (SRP). The SRP funds university-based multidisciplinary research on human health and environmental issues related to hazardous substances. To learn more about the ongoing URI STEEP Project, a partnership of the University of Rhode Island, Harvard University, and the Silent Spring Institute, visit https://web.uri.edu/steep/.

Source: University of Rhode Island via Water Online.

 

 

Water News Briefs


Posted April 20th, 2023

Water News Briefs for April 2023

Lead Pipe Replacement Moves at a Snail’s Pace

In 2018, almost 30 cities across New York state received federal money to carry out a specific, urgent task: removing lead service lines that poison drinking water. The city of Troy – which sits across the Hudson River and just north of Albany – was among them, receiving $500,000. But five years later, city leaders have failed to spend a single dollar of that money, and have yet to remove a single lead pipe. The revelation emerged at a city council meeting this winter, raising all sorts of questions. Chief among them is why the city hasn’t spent the money. Troy’s failure illustrates the challenges small cities face when trying to address environmental injustices like lead pipes.  Full article from The Guardian.

 

World’s Ocean Temperature Hits All-Time High

The temperature of the world’s ocean surface has hit an all-time high since satellite records began, leading to marine heatwaves around the globe, according to US government data. Climate scientists said preliminary data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration showed the average temperature at the ocean’s surface has been at 21.1C since the start of April – beating the previous high of 21C set in 2016. “The current trajectory looks like it’s headed off the charts, smashing previous records,” said climate scientist Prof Matthew England. Hotter oceans provide more energy for storms, as well as putting ice sheets at risk and pushing up global sea levels, caused by salt water expanding as it warms. Marine heatwaves can also have devastating effects on marine wildlife and cause coral bleaching on tropical reefs. The Guardian.

Railroads Follow Rivers.

Decisions made more than 150 years ago about where to run railroad tracks have significant consequences today when trains derail. That’s because rail lines usually follow rivers. At a time when climate change is altering rainfall and flooding patterns increasing the risk of washouts and mudslides on tracks, it is increasingly risky and irresponsible to run large trainloads of petroleum and hazardous chemicals along the banks of rivers. The Colorado River, for example, furnishes water for 40 million people.  A significant derailment along the Colorado could be devastating. USA Today.

Industry Knew about the Dangers of PFAS Decades Ago, but Kept It Secret

Industry sponsored studies documented PFAS toxicity in 1978 but this information was not shared with the US EPA until 2000. PFAS have been linked to a range of health problems, including testicular and kidney cancers, decreased birth weight, and thyroid disease. While most companies have stopped producing two forms of PFAS— perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS)—the chemicals persist in drinking water systems, and new forms of PFAS are raising concerns. This revelation underlines the basic truth that allowing industry to voluntarily regulate itself does not work. Strong governmental oversight is essential.

 

Ice Sheets Are Shrinking Much Faster Than Predicted

New research shows that the massive ice sheets at the top and bottom of our planet are shrinking much faster than previously thought. The international study compiled satellite measurements over time and depicts what one researcher described as a “devastating trajectory.” PBS News.

 

gardenhosebasket

Garden Hose Art Like the Decorative  Basket Above  Was Once Featured in National Garden Hose Day Events

 

National Garden Hose Day Is On the Ropes Because of the Political Climate

National Garden Hose Day,  a lusty national holiday celebrated in June, reached peak popularity as an early summer good time event in the years preceding the pandemic.  Garden Hose Day festivities were curtailed beginning in 2020 due to public health concerns, and, unfortunately, efforts to bring the holiday back have faltered because of the divisive political climate.

Many US cities have already cancelled Garden Hose celebrations this year because of fears of transgender participation in the Garden Hose Tug, a tug of war event that is often the center of Garden Hose festivities. Critics also point out that the garden hose is not mentioned either in the Bible or the US Constitution and that the shape of the garden hose itself has sexual implications and should not be seen by children under 18. In Texas and Mississippi there are now bills before the state legislature to remove books from libraries that have pictures of garden hoses.

(Since fake news has become so common that it’s hard to recognize these days, the Pure Water Gazette wishes to advise that the article above is completely phony. Please do not sue or write abusive letters. While we’re at it we’ll confess to having invented and shamelessly promoted a non-existent holiday for a number of years. To our credit, we did not try to sell you a Monkey Pox tee shirt or a NFT depiction of Garden Hose Superman blasting the enemies of the Second Amendment with a high powered fire hose. Here’s a Garden Hose Day article from 2013, back in the good old days before politics got so nasty that you couldn’t enjoy a good old summer Garden Hose Tug or Hose Blast competition.)

 

Can Water Cause Weight Gain?

Important research published in the journal Obesity establishes a definite link between weight gain and PFAS in drinking water. “Our study adds new evidence that being overweight isn’t just about a lack of physical activity and unhealthy eating habits – PFAS are increasingly suspected to be a contributing factor.”  The PFAS exposures in the European participants are quite comparable to levels in America, so my concern is that our exposures to PFAS are making it difficult for us to avoid getting overweight.”  Full article in Pure Water Gazette.

 

 

 

 

 

Camp Lejeune Toxic Water Case Payout Could Top $21 Billion

 

by Peter Chawaga

 

usmctaintedwater_31

Camp Lejeune served its soldiers and their families highly contaminated water over a period of 24 years

 

“Hundreds of thousands of veterans and their relatives exposed to cancer-causing drinking water on the North Carolina Marine base are expected to file claims,” Bloomberg Law reported. “The bill lawmakers passed last summer acknowledged the government’s culpability and had an estimated price tag of $6.1 billion. The Congressional Budget Office says that total could balloon in later years by another $15 billion.”

The issues with Camp Lejeune’s water date back decades, with some speculating that chemicals leaking from a dry-cleaning operation nearby were originally to blame. Service members and their families were exposed to the dangerous effluent for more than three decades, and the recent Congressional act gave anyone who spent more than 30 days on the base between 1953 and 1987 the chance to file a civil claim. As a result, law firm advertisements offering to represent victims have proliferated.

Camp Lejeune served its soldiers and their families highly contaminated water over a period of 24 years

“Law firms and legal marketing agencies spent more than $145 million on advertising last year in a bid to recruit them,” according to Bloomberg Law.

But despite the federal clearance and eagerness of legal representatives, victim health claims have been slow to resolve.

“Even though Congress passed a law last August giving Camp Lejeune victims two years to sue for damages in federal court, the process of compensating the thousands of people affected by the contamination is moving at a snail’s pace,” according to Roll Call. “The Navy and Marine Corps, which have denied responsibility for causing health problems at the base since the contamination was first discovered in 1982, have taken no action on about 20,000 damage claims filed with the Navy Judge Advocate General after the legislation was signed into law.”

As the claims pile up and legal firms continue to push toward resolution per the Congressional approval, it’s clear that this decades-long saga over one of the most shocking drinking water contamination issues in American history is far from over.

“Here we are six-plus months since the bill was passed and to my knowledge not one claim has been settled, not one offer has been made,” Mike Partaine, a man who was born at Camp Lejeune and has since been diagnosed with breast cancer, told Roll Call. “Why is it taking so long? That’s what the community has been saying too.”

To read more about how water systems address harmful chemicals, visit Water Online’s Drinking Water Contaminant Removal Solutions Center.

Water Online

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

Water News Briefs


Posted March 21st, 2023

Water News Briefs for March 2023

New studies reveal that toilet paper can be a serious contributor to PFAS levels found in wastewater. Phys.org. For information about the origin of PFAS in toilet paper and significance, see the excellent Guardian report.

Lake Mead continues to shrink and is now at the lowest level it has been since it was first filled. “Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir and one that provides water and power to millions of people in southern California, has reached its lowest levels since its first filling in the 1960s,” USA Today reported. “If the lake’s level falls much lower, it won’t be possible to get water out of it … If the lake falls another 32 feet — about the amount it fell in the past year — power generation concerns become more urgent.”  Pure Water Gazette. Ironically, as many areas suffer with record drought, recent storms have filled some California lakes to their highest level in years. Newsweek.

Alarmingly high levels of PFAS have been found in lakes in Alaska’s two largest cities,  Fairbanks and Anchorage.  Some lake water has PFAS levels 1000 times what is considered safe for drinking water. “Use of PFAS compounds began in the 1950s, and there are thousands of them. Most famously, they are found in flame-suppressants. Most of the environmental PFAS contamination in Alaska and many other places is believed to have been caused by use of those firefighting foams at airports, where their use is mandated by the Federal Aviation Administration. Military sites are also known for using such foams. But the PFAS compounds are widespread in consumer and industrial products like nonstick cookware, clothing, upholstery and personal-care goods such as shampoos. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not degrade.”  Alaska Beacon.

An estimated 8,100 gallons of latex finishing material, a water-soluble acrylic polymer solution, was released into Otter Creek in Bristol, Pennsylvania, on March 25. Boil water alerts are expected. Yahoo.

The EPA has determined that US military bases with cancer-linked PFAS-contaminated drinking water have been significantly undercounted. “Data obtained from the Department of Defense (DOD) by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), under the Freedom of Information Act, show that locations with notably high levels of total PFAS include Fort Leavenworth, in Kansas; the Joint Forces Training Base, in California; Belmont Armory, in Michigan; McChord Air Force Base, in Washington; Fort Hunter Liggett, in California; and the Sierra Army Depot, in California.” When water at military bases is contaminated, communities in their vicinity are usually at risk as well.  Water Online.

The EPA has released new draft Maximum Containment Levels (MCL) for PFOA and PFOS (collectively part of the group of chemicals known as PFAS) permissible in drinking water at a national level.  The new allowable levels are 4 ppt for PFOA and 4 ppt for PFOS.  For context, one part per trillion is one drop per 21 million gallons of water.  See the full article below from Environmental Health News for details.

Chinese archaeologists discovered what may be one of the world’s oldest manual flush toilets — dating back 2,200 to 2,400 years, per Live Science.

A massive 5,000-mile seaweed bloom is approaching the Florida coast and threatening water quality. The seaweed, known as sargassum, can tangle up boats and other marine machinery, release dangerous hydrogen sulfide, and inundate beaches. The seeweed is laced with heavy metals like arsenic which make disposal and reuse extremely difficult. Research suggests the causes for this massive bloom are related to climate change and are similar to those that have been driving increases in source water algal bloom, which threatens drinking water quality, across the country.  Water Online.

 

Are We Slowly Dying of Thirst?

The world is facing an imminent water crisis, with demand expected to outstrip the supply of fresh water by 40% by the end of this decade, experts have said on the eve of a crucial UN water summit. Governments must urgently stop subsidising the extraction and overuse of water through misdirected agricultural subsidies, and industries from mining to manufacturing must be made to overhaul their wasteful practices, according to a landmark report on the economics of water. Nations must start to manage water as a “global commons”, because most countries are highly dependent on their neighbors for water supplies; and overuse, pollution and the climate crisis threaten water supplies globally, the report’s authors say.  — The Guardian.  Lkewise, the U.N. issued a warning that “vampiric overconsumption” is rapidly depleting the world’s water supply. BC Water News.

Plasticosis

The world’s oceans are permeated with plastic waste, from surface waters to some of their deepest reaches. And we know from numerous studies that fish, turtles, seabirds and smaller sea creatures are ingesting bits of plastic when they feed. Now, scientists are starting to pin down the effects of a plastic diet.

Marine scientist Matthew Savoca explains findings from a recent study that identified a new illness, which the authors call plasticosis, in seabirds. Scarring in the birds’ digestive tracts resembles effects in humans who are longtime smokers or have been exposed to asbestos. As Savoca sees it, plasticosis “could be a sign that a new age of disease is upon us because of human overuse of plastics and other long-lasting contaminants, and their leakage into the environment.” The Conversation.

Only Fleck 5600  on Our Website Now

5600sxtbackwashing

 

By far our most popular backwashing filters over the years have been those built with the reliable and very user friendly Fleck 5600 control. Now only 5600 filters are shown on our website. We made the change to 5600 only for water softeners a couple of years ago and it has worked out well.

The 5600 has size limitations. It works only on filters that need a backwash rate of 7 gallons per minute or less.  If a larger filter than those shown on our site is needed, we can usually supply it, but it can’t be ordered from the shopping cart. We still stock and support the Fleck 2510 models that were recently taken down, but they are available by phone only so that we can assure that they are properly sized. We also sell much larger filters and softeners with Fleck and Nelsen C-Series (Clack) controls that are not shown on the website.

The very popular Fleck 5600 SXT (simple electronics) control, pictured above, is ideal for customer-maintained filters.  No special tools are needed for repairs and parts are easy to find.  We program the control before it is shipped, and changes in programming are easy. We still supply the time-clock version of the 5600 as well for those who prefer it.

Our Fleck 5600 backwashing  filters.

 

New PFAS guidelines – a water quality scientist explains technology and investment needed to get forever chemicals out of US drinking water

PFASinfabrics

 Chemicals used to create water-repellent fabrics and nonstick pans often contain PFAS and leak those chemicals into the environment.

Harmful chemicals known as PFAS can be found in everything from children’s clothes to soil to drinking water, and regulating these chemicals has been a goal of public and environmental health researchers for years. On March 14, 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposed what would be the first set of federal guidelines regulating levels of PFAS in drinking water. The guidelines will be open to public comment for 60 days before being finalized.

Joe Charbonnet is an environmental engineer at Iowa State University who develops techniques to remove contaminants like PFAS from water. He explains what the proposed guidelines would require, how water utilities could meet these requirements and how much it might cost to get these so-called forever chemicals out of U.S. drinking water.

1. What do the new guidelines say?

PFAS are associated with a variety of health issues and have been a focus of environmental and public health researchers. There are thousands of members of this class of chemicals, and this proposed regulation would set the allowable limits in drinking water for six of them.

Two of the six chemicals – PFOA and PFOS – are no longer produced in large quantities, but they remain common in the environment because they were so widely used and break down extremely slowly. The new guidelines would allow for no more than four parts per trillion of PFOA or PFOS in drinking water.

Four other PFAS – GenX, PFBS, PFNA and PFHxS – would be regulated as well, although with higher limits. These chemicals are common replacements for PFOA and PFOS and are their close chemical cousins. Because of their similarity, they cause harm to human and environmental health in much the same way as legacy PFAS.

A few states have already established their own limits on levels of PFAS in drinking water, but these new guidelines, if enacted, would be the first legally enforceable federal limits and would affect the entire U.S.

2. How many utilities will need to make changes?

PFAS are harmful even at extremely low levels, and the proposed limits reflect that fact. The allowable concentrations would be comparable to a few grains of salt in an Olympic-size swimming pool. Hundreds of utilities all across the U.S. have levels of PFAS above the proposed limits in their water supplies and would need to make changes to meet these standards.

While many areas have been tested for PFAS in the past, many systems have not, so health officials don’t know precisely how many water systems would be affected. A recent study used existing data to estimate that about 40% of municipal drinking water supplies may exceed the proposed concentration limits.

3. What can utilities do to meet the guidelines?

There are two major technologies that most utilities consider for removing PFAS from drinking water: activated carbon or ion exchange systems.

Activated carbon is a charcoal-like substance that PFAS stick to quite well and can be used to remove PFAS from water. In 2006, the town of Oakdale, Minnesota, added an activated carbon treatment step to its water system. Not only did this additional water treatment bring PFAS levels down substantially, there were significant improvements in birth weight and the number of full-term pregnancies in that community after the change.

Ion exchange systems work by flowing water over charged particles that can remove PFAS. Ion exchange systems are typically even better at lowering PFAS concentrations than activated carbon systems, but they are also more expensive.

Another option available to some cities is simply finding alternative water sources that are less contaminated. While this is a wonderful, low-cost means of lowering contamination, it points to a major disparity in environmental justice; more rural and less well-resourced utilities are unlikely to have this option.

4. Is such a major transition feasible?

By law, the EPA must consider not just human health but also the feasibility of treatment and the potential financial cost when setting maximum contaminant levels in drinking water. While the proposed limits are certainly attainable for many water utilities, the costs will be high.

The federal government has made available billions of dollars in funding for treating water. But some estimates put the total cost of meeting the proposed regulations for the entire country at around US$400 billion – much more than the available funding. Some municipalities may seek financial help for treatment from nearby polluters, while others may raise water rates to cover the costs.

5. What happens next?

The EPA has set a 60-day period for public comment on the proposed regulations, after which it can finalize the guidelines. But many experts expect the EPA to face a number of legal challenges. Time will tell what the final version of the regulations may look like.

This regulation is intended to keep the U.S. in the enviable position of having some of the highest-quality drinking water in the world. As researchers and health officials learn more about new chemical threats, it is important to ensure that every resident has access to clean and affordable tap water.

While these six PFAS certainly pose threats to health that merit regulation, there are thousands of PFAS that likely have very similar impacts on human health. Rather than playing chemical whack-a-mole by regulating one PFAS at a time, there is a growing consensus among researchers and public health officials that PFAS should be regulated as a class of chemicals.

Article source: The Conversation.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

PFAS: EPA releases proposed drinking water standards for six “forever chemicals”

The Biden administration announcement comes after years of pleas from exposed communities, scientists and health and environmental activists.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced today new proposed drinking water standards for six individual PFAS chemicals —a move that could re-shape how drinking water is tested, sourced and treated throughout the U.S.

If adopted, the proposed changes would represent the first modification to drinking water standards for new chemicals under the Safe Drinking Water Act since 1996.

PFAS, short for per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of potentially harmful chemicals used in multiple products including nonstick pans, cosmeticssome clothingfood packaging and firefighting foams. They are linked to multiple negative health outcomes including some cancers, reproductive problems and birth defects, among others. The chemicals don’t break down readily in the environment, so are often called “forever chemicals.” The nonprofit Environmental Working Group has found PFAS contamination at more than 2,800 locations in all 50 states, including in many public and private drinking water systems.

Related: What are PFAS?

The proposed changes would regulate two chemicals that are no longer in use, PFOA and PFOS,  at 4 parts per trillion. Four other chemicals — PFNA, PFHxS, PFBS and GenX — would be regulated based on the hazard of the mixture of them. While the six chemicals in the proposal are common, there are an estimated more than 9,000 types of PFAS compounds.

If the regulations are adopted, water system operators would have to test for the chemicals. If they are found above the thresholds, they’d have to take action — by installing additional treatment, finding a new water source or other methods. Public water treatment systems would have about three years to comply.

EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan said in a statement the proposal is “informed by the best available science, and would help provide states with the guidance they need to make decisions that best protect their communities.”

“This action has the potential to prevent tens of thousands of PFAS-related illnesses and marks a major step toward safeguarding all our communities from these dangerous contaminants,” he added.

Last year the EPA released lifetime health advisories for GenX, PFBS, PFOA and PFOS, and opened up $10 billion in grant funding — via the 2022 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act— to assist communities dealing with PFAS and other emerging contaminants.

Environmental groups seek PFAS phase-outs

Environmental groups lauded the new proposed changes — and urged a complete phase-out of PFAS in products.

“We applaud the Biden administration for following the lead of the states and stepping up to protect communities from these toxic ‘forever chemicals,’” said Sarah Doll, national director of Safer States, in a statement. “We urge the federal government to continue to follow the lead of states and phase out the production and use of these chemicals in favor of safer solutions so that we stop adding PFAS to our already polluted water, land, and air.”

Ten states — Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin — have already established standards for individual PFAS in drinking water. Many retailers — most recently REI — are phasing out the chemicals as well.

Liz Hitchcock, federal policy program director for Toxic-Free Future, said in a statement that the regulations are an important step but “to prevent further PFAS contamination, we must put an end to uses of PFAS chemicals in firefighting foams used by military and civilian firefighters and in consumer products like food packaging and textiles.”

The new proposed regulation will open for public comment, and then the agency will make a final decision — likely later this year.

Source: Environmental Health News.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement

If the mountain won’t come to Muhammad, then Muhammad must go to the mountain

by Gene Franks

As the western United States slowly but surely runs out of water, the same old ideas for saving the nation’s dryest areas keep coming up. See USA Today  Unfortunately,  not one of the proposed strategies seems to have even the slightest chance of being implemented.  The one that actually shows promise, significant water conservation, is too radical to even be considered.

Here are the most commonly suggested nutty ideas, as well as the one that could actually work:

1. Water conservation. This is the one that has been proven to work, but for conservation really to make a dent in the massive water shortage, people would have to be willing to give up things like green lawns and green golf courses and to severely cut back on some of their favorite foods, like hamburgers. In the United States, meat consumption alone accounts for a full 30 percent of our water consumption. Pity the politician who suggests cutting back .

2. Talk Northeasterners into giving up the Great Lakes and moving them, or at least moving their water, to feed into the Colorado River. The problems like building the massive pipelines required and getting the water to flow uphill across the Great Divide still have to be worked out.

3. Building nuclear-powered desalination plants on the coast. These would be, I presume, gigantic water distillers or banks of square mile-sized reverse osmosis units powered by electricity made by nuclear reactors.

4. Harvesting icebergs. This idea has been talked about for decades, but is anyone really serious about it? Towing icebergs to California? And when  you run out of icebergs?

5.Chopping down forests. Certainly the worst idea of all. The theory is that since trees use water, cutting down trees would free up water for more golf courses, green lawns, and hamburgers. The 751,000 disadvantages to having fewer trees haven’t been considered.

My own addition to the list is Move people to where the water is. There is plenty of water–it just isn’t where people want it. Most of the solutions listed above are about moving water to where people need it. Would it not be a lot easier to move the people to where the water is? Moving Las Vegas and Phoenix to Michigan or Illinois sounds almost impossible, but would it be any harder than moving Lake Erie and Lake Michigan to the Southwestern desert?

The nutty ideas for saving the Southwest are from USA Today.  The sensible plan to move Las Vegas and Phoenix north is my very own.

Pure Water Gazette

Chloramines in Drinking Water

The EPA’s webpage on chloramines begins with this paragraph:

Chloramines are disinfectants used to treat drinking water. Chloramines are most commonly formed when ammonia is added to chlorine to treat drinking water. The typical purpose of chloramines is to provide longer-lasting water treatment as the water moves through pipes to consumers. This type of disinfection is known as secondary disinfection. Chloramines have been used by water utilities for almost 90 years, and their use is closely regulated. More than one in five Americans uses drinking water treated with chloramines. Water that contains chloramines and meets EPA regulatory standards is safe to use for drinking, cooking, bathing and other household uses.

In spite of the EPA’s assurances of safety, the use of chloramine in city water supplies has provoked continual controversy. And for many reasons, including simple aesthetic preference, a high percentage of city water users want chloramines removed from the water they drink and bathe in.

Treatment for Chloramines: How to Remove Chloramines from Water

Reduction of chloramines from city water is a commonly misunderstood issue. For those unfamiliar with the details of water treatment, there is often an expectation that there is a “filter” for every contaminant and the water goes through the filter that specifically identifies that contaminant and, as if by magic, “takes it out.” A frequent question is “How much does your filter take out?” It isn’t quite as simple as that, especially with “problem contaminants” like chloramines.

centaur

Below is an explanation of chloramine treatment excerpted  from a Water Technology article on chloramines by technical writer David Bauman. The “catalytic carbon” Mr. Bauman refers to is commonly known by its most popular brand name, Centaur carbon. Another very popular catalytic is Aquasorb coconut shell catalytic.

Removal possibilities  Chloramines should not be confused with chlorine. Chloramines  cannot be removed by passing water through the same activated carbon filters used for chlorine removal because these filters are too small at their designed flow rates.

The following are four types of water treatment technologies that can be used to remove chloramines at the point of use:

Catalytic Carbon. This carbon has a surface structure that has been altered from standard activated carbon, enabling it to remove chloramines, providing close attention is given to contact time, mesh size of the carbon and influent temperature. Theoretically, the carbon decomposes chloramine into traces of nitrogen gas, ammonia gas and chloride. If these reactions are not allowed to be completed, surface oxygen groups form that can foul or exhaust the carbon.

With a 2-mg/L chloramine influent level, enhanced catalytic carbon can produce product water that maintains a <0.1-mg/L residual (required for dialysis). Manufacturer’s data on this type of carbon refer to flow rates ranging from 30 seconds to two minutes of empty bed contact time (EBCT). This converts to between about 3.5 gallons per minute per cubic feet (gpm/ft3) and 15 gpm/ft3.

This does not mean that 15 gpm/ft3 is acceptable. For example, although the product water may be acceptable at this rate, the pressure loss may be prohibitive and the length of run before chloramine breakthrough may be reduced from 88,000 gallons to 11,000 gallons. Designers of dialysis water treatment systems use 10 minutes of EBCT. This contact time was established prior to the development of catalytic carbon, but because of the specifications required by the US Food and Drug Administration, which regulates dialysis water treatment equipment as medical devices, in most cases this has not changed. According to catalytic carbon data, this time could be reduced to about three minutes.

Decreasing the mesh size of the carbon can more than double the gallon throughput, although it may also create more pressure loss. An increase in temperature from about 58 degrees F to 72 F also can more than double the gallon throughput.

The word catalytic normally means enabling a reaction without entering into the reaction. This would imply that the catalyst would never change or become depleted. In reality this is probably not true; other adsorbable and ionic species in the water adsorb onto the carbon and eventually mask the catalytic sites. The more catalytic sites there are on the carbon, the longer its useful life.

In addition, friction physically depletes the material; other foulants, such as iron, can foul it; and high pressure differential can crush it.

Standard activated carbon. Used for chloramine removal long before catalytic carbon became available, standard activated carbon requires a very long contact time, which means a large volume of carbon is needed.

Everything attributed to catalytic carbon applies to standard carbon, although to a lesser degree. All activated carbon has some catalytic capability, but standard carbons of all common basic materials have a relatively low activity for chloramine removal. For thorough removal, up to four times the contact time of catalytic carbon may be required. Substantial increases in percent removal and length of run before chloramine breakthrough can be achieved with smaller mesh carbon. Some systems have been designed that precondition the carbon by exposure to general use or to chlorine.

Carbon cartridge filters
 have been tested for chloramine removal, but since no national testing standard has been established, no claims are being made. Some cartridges have a real advantage: Fine or powdered carbons, such as those used in cartridges, are excellent chloramine removal media in spite of not being made from catalytic material.

They can render the discussions regarding catalytic vs. standard carbon moot.

Ascorbic acid. Used for dialysis before the development of catalytic carbon, this acid acted – as would other reducing agents – by reducing monochloramine to chloride and ammonia. However, this acid is not advised for drinking water applications and is no longer used for dialysis treatment. [Gazette note: This is the treatment method used in the “Vitamin C” shower filters sold online. They aren’t actually “filters” but injectors. They inject a small amount of ascorbic acid into the shower water stream. Our rudimentary testing indicated that they reduce chloramine effectively but have other issues.]

The practical realities one is left with from Mr. Bauman’s excellent summation of removal strategies are that

1. Except in a controlled industrial setting, it is next to impossible to predict the lifespan or the exact reduction percentage of a water filter used for chloramines.

2. Such variables as water temperature, flow rate, mesh size of the medium (in the case of carbon), and other contaminants in the water greatly affect the effectiveness and the longevity of the filter.

3. The often-used blanket statement that “reverse osmosis does not remove chloramines” is technically true but realistically false. While the reverse osmosis membrane itself does not remove chloramines, every respectable RO unit is equipped with two or more high quality carbon filters. Pre-filters, the filters that process the water before the membrane, receive water at a very slow rate of flow and therefore work under excellent conditions for chloramine reduction. The use of the high quality cartridges described by Mr. Bauman actually should provide superb chloramine reduction in an undersink RO unit, yet the “reverse osmosis does not remove chloramines” myth continues to be promoted by sellers of non-RO products.

4. If you are thinking of purchasing a “whole house” chloramine filter, your choice in sizing should include consideration of the life expextancy of the carbon. Mr. Bauman’s figures show that the carbon’s lifespan could be reduced to as little as 1/8 by undersizing.

Article Source: The Pure Water Occasional.  David Bauman’s comments were excerpted from his column in Water Technology magazine.

 

Lake Powell Hits Its Lowest Water Level Since Being Filled, Raising Questions About Drought Response

 

by Peter Chawaga

 

lakepowellshrinking

 

In the latest alarming milestone for dwindling water supplies in the West, one of the most important reservoirs in the world has been brought to the lowest point in its
history.

“Lake Powell, the nation’s second-largest reservoir and one that provides water and power to millions of people in southern California, has reached its lowest levels since its first filling in the 1960s,” USA Today reported. “If the lake’s level falls much lower, it won’t be possible to get water out of it … If the lake falls another 32 feet — about the amount it fell in the past year — power generation concerns become more urgent.”

Water managers have been on high alert concerning Lake Powell and its companion reservoir, Lake Mead, for months as increasing drought and consumption demands bring them to the brink of complete dryness. Last year, researchers concluded that the reservoirs’ levels were unlikely to remain stable. Federal officials have asked the states that utilize the Colorado River, which feeds these reservoirs, to agree on consumption cutbacks, but those negotiations have not been fruitful.

But even with Lake Powell hitting a new low, it’s hard to imagine immediate reversal of the fundamental problems that are driving the western drought and imperiling the Colorado River.

“More than four scientific studies have pinned a large part of the decline on human climate change,” according to USA Today. “It’s partly that there’s less rain and snow, partly that as temperatures rise, plants use more water and more water evaporates out of the soil which would otherwise have ended up in the river. In addition, the river itself experiences more evaporation.”

While there seems to be little that any immediate action can achieve, aside from motivating the states using Colorado River water to cut back, the consequences of an empty Lake Powell could ultimately change our relationship with water sources around the world forever.

“Experts agree that urgent water policy reform is needed to protect the Colorado River reservoirs,” per Newsweek. “Experts have put the ongoing megadrought down to climate change. This means in the long term, there also needs to be initiatives in place that will prevent climate change from worsening.”

 

Source: Water Online.

Pure Water Gazette Fair Use Statement