Pure Water Occasional, August 23, 2020 |
PWP Shutdown Schedule and Website Changes |
Pure Water Products' online business is doing business as usual during the shutdown. We are offering the same services as before for internet customers, including phone and email product support. Since we've spread our staff out and are working more from home, we may be a little slower shipping or responding to calls and emails. Also, we have no scheduled Saturday phone support hours, though if you email, or call and leave a message, we'll respond promptly. Shipping delays beyond our control are more common than usual, but most customers have been patient and understanding. Thank you for your patience.
Locally, we've closed down our walk-in services and are not doing service calls or installations. We are actively doing "curb-side" pickup services, however. You can pick up anything we sell at our Denton store if you order online or by phone.
Thank you for your cooperation. We take the current health crises seriously and are doing everything we can to protect the health of our staff and customers.
We have redone our backwashing filter pages, making it a lot easier to find filters of all sizes and for all purposes. Pricing may seem higher, but it's mainly because we have made SXT electronic units standard where before they were higher priced options. You can still buy mechanical timers, and you'll get a discount if you do, but the price that shows on the site is now for the SXT unit. If you want a specific filter size or style that you don't see on the page, please ask. The site shows the most popular sizes and style, but we can supply virtually any size backwashing filter. Residential filters shown are with 5600 or 2510 controls, but you can have a 5810 if you inquire.
The softener page has also been streamlined. Again, if prices look higher it is mainly because we now offer the metered SXT units as standard rather than as an option. Likewise, the page does not include mechanical meter (Econominder) units, but we still have them if you call or email and ask. Fleck 2510 and 5810 units are also available although they aren't shown on our websites.
|
With hand washing accepted as essential in self-defense against Covid 19, a severe household water shortage facing two out of five people in the world is undermining efforts to contain the coronavirus pandemic. Some 3 billion people don’t have access to running water and soap at home, and 4 billion suffer from severe water scarcity for at least one month a year. Bloomberg Green.
A stinking black plume of raw sewage spilled onto the beach at Acapulco. Residents have complained for years about raw sewage leaking into the bay.
The Michigan Dept. of Health and Human Services advises that foam in the water of lakes and rivers can contain much higher levels of PFAS contamination than the water itself. While PFAS is not readily taken in through the skin, it's wise to avoid foam in recreational waters. Report.
In Ft. Lauderdale, a subcontractor accidentally drilled a hole in a 42" water main and tried plugging it with a tree limb. Hundreds of businesses were forced to close and 250,000 people were left without water. The pipe is fixed, but it appears that litigation will go on for years. This is a story worth reading. Sun Sentinel.
Kame Gowda, a shepherd from a village in southern India, has become known as the "water warrior" for digging several ponds that provide year-around water in the village. For his efforts he has been given a lifetime free pass by the local public transportation system. NDTV.
In July, a woman was apparently killed by a shark while swimming in Maine. The Guardian. Sharks are expected to be seen more frequently in beach areas because ocean warming is changing the habits of seals, one of their favorite foods. Feared by humans as savage creatures, sharks kill on average slightly over one human per year. Humans kill around 100 million sharks per year mainly by cutting off their fins to make a pricey status dish known as shark fin soup. Pure Water Gazette.
A potentially deadly antibiotic-resistant bacteria could be hiding in the dirt and water of the southernmost U.S. states, according to a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The bacterial infection, called melioidosis, attacks the lungs. Full article from U.S.News.
A Bismarck news source reports that high sulfate levels in water for livestock are resulting in lethargic animals and can even cause seizures and blindness in animals. Above-average sulfate levels (over 3,000 ppm) are also being blamed on lack of snow-melt. Kxnet.com.
Puerto Rico’s Governor Wanda Vázquez declared a state of emergency on June 29 due to an ongoing drought on the island. On July 2, the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority began limiting water services for nearly 150,000 residents for 24 hours every other day. The rationing is scheduled to go on indefinitely. The island’s capital, San Juan, is included in the rationing. "More than 32 percent of the island is experiencing a severe drought, while another 54 percent is experiencing a moderate drought, according to the US Drought Monitor. In most municipalities, watering gardens, filling pools, and the use of a hose and non-recycled water to wash cars is prohibited. Those who are caught can be fined $250 for individuals and $2,500 for businesses." More details.
"Credible evidence suggests that only half of waterborne disease outbreaks in community water systems (and about one third of those in non-community systems) are ever detected, investigated, or even reported. Microbes in tap water may actually be responsible for as many as 30 percent of gastrointestinal illness in the US . . . ." Greg Reyneke in WC&P International, June 2020.
The city of Katy, TX was awarded a superior rating for its water for the 32nd year in a row.
States continue to set PFAS standards much lower than the 70 ppt EPA standard. Gov. Chris Sununu of New Hampshire recently signed a bill into law setting the state's limit for perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances at 12 to 15 ppt. Fosters.com.
July 30 marked the 100th anniversary of the birth of Marie Tharp, a geologist and oceanographer who created maps that changed the way people imagine two-thirds of the world. Beginning in 1957, Tharp and her research partner, Bruce Heezen, began publishing the first comprehensive maps that showed the main features of the ocean bottom – mountains, valleys and trenches. Some insist that Tharp should be as famous as Jane Goodall or Neil Armstrong. The Conversation.
|
FAQ
This section always includes actual questions received since the previous Occasional and our actual answer.
|
Question:
Do you have a PDF you could share with me that explains how to replace the bulb on a Pura UVBB 3 system? I just ordered a bulb and am going to change it for the first time.
Answer:
Here's the owner's manual on the unit --
It gives lamp change details beginning on page 19.
The best advice we have is change the lamp from the top, not the bottom. Instead of removing the blue sump and the inner quartz sleeve to get to the lamp, just take the white control box loose on top (held on by four screws), pull the box straight up and the lamp is plugged into the bottom of the box.
Replace the lamp and reinstall the box.
If you can't do that (e. g., if the unit is installed under a shelf or a pipe that won't let you pull the lamp all the way out), you'll have to do it from the bottom. Remove the blue sump, carefully remove the quartz sleeve (the glass tube that protects the lamp), remove and replace the lamp, then reassemble.
The sleeve is removed by pulling it straight down. Likewise, the lamp. Wear gloves so you can handle the glass parts without getting finger prints and smudges on them. This is a tricky job on BB units, and it's easy to break the quartz sleeve, so change the lamp by removing the control box if at all possible.
Feel free to call if you hit a snag or need clarification.
|
Frequently Asked Questions About Aermax Systems
|
|
Pure Water Annie’s FAQ Series.
Pure Water Gazette Technical Wizard Pure Water Annie Answers All the Persistent Questions about Water Treatment.
Aer-Max aeration systems, for treatment of iron and hydrogen sulfide.
How does Aer-Max work?
Aer-Max works by providing a pocket of compressed air in the top third of a closed tank. When water containing hard-to-treat contaminants like iron, manganese, and hydrogen sulfide falls through the air pocket, the contaminants are oxidized so they can be easily removed by a filter. The compressed air is supplied by a small air pump. A vent is provided to keep the air pocket fresh.
The Aer-Max system is not a filter. It prepares contaminants for easy removal by a filter that follows the aeration tank.
There are 110-volt and 220-volt systems. Which is better?
The voltage needed depends mainly on how the unit is to be controlled. The pump and vent can be turned off and on by having them wired directly into the electrical circuit that turns the well pump off and on. Since most well pumps run on 220 volt current, if you choose this method of control it’s easiest to use a 220-volt Aer-Max. If you use an alternative control system, like a flow switch or a simple timer, however, you would want the 110-volt system.
Which is the best way to control the system?
For residential use, the flow switch is the last choice. It turns the Aer-Max unit on when water flows through the pipe toward the home. Usually this results in frequent and short on/off cycles and is the least efficient way to operate the system. The conventional method is to bring 220-volt electrical receptacles for the air pump and the vent solenoid out of the pressure switch that controls the well pump. With this system, the AerMax is activated when the well pump runs and turns off when the well pump is not running. This is a proven system and it works well. Use of a simple timer, the kind used to turn lamps off and on at specified times, is becoming the most popular, however. It’s easiest to install: you just plug the pump and vent solenoid into the timer and plug the timer into a wall receptacle.
Standard Aer-Max System
But doesn’t the air pump have to be running while water is going through the treatment tank?
This is probably the biggest source of misunderstanding about how Aer-Max works. The rich pocket of compressed air in the top of the treatment tank needs only to be refreshed from time to time: effective treatment does not depend on fresh air entering while water is running through the tank. With hydrogen sulfide, for example, while a small amount of the offensive gas may be vented out of the tank by the drain system, treatment consists mainly of reducing the odor-causing gas to elemental sulfur so that it can be removed by the filter that follows the air treatment tank.
Residential users who control the unit with timers usually run the air pump only about three times a week. This vents the tank and refreshes the air pocket. Unless you run large amounts of water, three times a week is enough.
What is the function of the three tubes attached to the aeration head in the illustration above?
From left, the first, the shortest, is a baffling device. It creates turbulence to enhance aeration as water entering the tank falls through the air pocket. The middle tube is the vent tube. It maintains the level of the air pocket in the tank. The long tube is the pickup tube for treated water being sent to the home.
What kind of filter has to be used after the Aer-Max?
Aer-Max enhances the performance of any standard iron filter medium. It works especially well with Birm, Filox, and Katalox Light. Media like Zeolite (Turbidex) and Filter Ag can be used as iron filters if the water is pre-treated with Aer-Max, and an especially effective treatment for both iron and low pH can be accomplished by using a backwashing calcite filter after Aer-Max. For large amounts of iron it’s best to use the best–Filox or Katalox Light. Both media will treat both iron and hydrogen sulfide after aeration.
Both Filox and Katalox Light work well with both hydrogen sulfide and iron. If hydrogen sulfide is present, Birm is not a good choice.
For hydrogen sulfide, catalytic carbon is the best available, but standard carbon also works well.
Actually, any granular filter medium will remove odor after AerMax, but carbon is best. If no iron or manganese is present, a cartridge style carbon filter (4.5″ X 20″ preferred) can be used to treat hydrogen sulfide odor, but a cartridge filter will stop up quickly if there’s iron in the water. With iron and manganese, a backwashing filter is required.
Standard Air Pump Used for Aer-Max
I’m using a water softener to remove iron, but it isn’t quite doing the job. Can I install an Aer-Max unit in front of it to improve its performance?
No. The Aer-Max will actually interfere with the softener’s ability to remove iron by turning the ferrous iron to ferric. Filters catch ferric iron easily, but a softener is an ion exchanger, not a filter.
If your water is hard and has iron, either remove both with the softener or use both filter and softener. The correct order of treatment if aeration is used is Aer-Max, iron filter, then softener.
How loud is the pump?
Approximately 50 decibels.
How long does the pump last, and does it need regular maintenance?
The pump usually runs 20,000 to 25,000 hours before bearings need replacement. It’s an easy pump to work on, and parts are available. The most common maintenance issue is cleaning.
Although the pump has an air filter, in some environments it will need an occasional cleaning (see instructions).
Which works best — Aer-Max or the newer style single tank aeration/filtration systems that are becoming popular?
Aer-Max and the newer single tank units, which have the filter and the aeration treatment in the same tank, work on exactly the same principle but there are some significant differences. In general, the Aer-Max is more robust and will handle higher contaminant levels and higher flow rates. It can also be used to pre-treat for multiple filters. Single-tank setups, which use a venturi draw rather than an air pump, are more compact (one tank rather than two), easier to install, and less expensive to purchase. Once installed, both systems are low maintenance unless high levels of iron are involved. Any equipment removing iron will eventually need some cleaning. The Aer-Max plus filter arrangement is definitely preferred over single tank units for large amounts of iron or hydrogen sulfide–over 8 parts per million of either.
Does the Aer-Max have to be vented outdoors when treating hydrogen sulfide because of the odor?
Odor isn’t an issue, but water is. The 3/8″ drain tube will vent both air and water when the vent valve is open, so it needs to be connected to a suitable drain. It is often teed into the drain tube or pipe that serves the backwashing filter, but it can simply be allowed to drain onto a lawn or water a shrub. The drain water isn’t toxic.
Is there only one size Aer-Max system?
No, there is a high capacity pump available and it can be used with larger aeration tanks to create high flow systems. The higher capacity pump is usually preferred on “constant pressure” wells, where a higher air pressure needs to be maintained in the treatment tank. The 10″ X 54″ treatment tank, with the standard air pump, works in almost all residential applications, so it is the system most frequently sold. See high capacity systems here.
|
Covid-19 From a Water Guy's Perspective
by Peter S. Cartwright, PE
|
Gazette Introductory Note: Now that we’re about half a year into the COVID-19 era, we’ve had truckloads of opinions and advice from the experts and the non-experts, the wise and the foolish, the Democrats and the Republicans, the holy and the unholy, the vaxxers and the anti-vaxxers–in short, from just about everyone. So, the views of a water treatment professional are in order. Below is an article by Mr. Peter Cartwright, a highly respected water treatment veteran. Mr. Cartwright’s article appeared in the July 2020 issue of Water Conditioning and Purification magazine.
Introduction
There's so much we don't know about the virus behind this pandemic but we are learning a little more each day. To the microbiologists, this virus is known as SARS-CoV-2, closely related to SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the SARS outbreak in 2002-3. Most of the current scientific information and recommendations are based on what we learned in dealing with the SARS virus, but there are significant differences. The normal incubation period is 2 to 14 days after infection; however, during this time, these people may be contagious without even knowing they are infected.
What Are Its Effects?
In addition to the well-known symptoms of fever, coughing and loss of breath, the CDC has recently added chills, muscle pain, headache, sore throat and loss of taste and/or smell. Additionally, medical personnel are now reporting blood clots and issues with kidneys, heart, intestines, liver and the brain. Doctors also suspect a link between COVID-19 and a rare inflammatory condition, Kawasaki Disease.
Source
So where dis this particular virus come from? Virologists estimate that about 1.7 million viruses are lurking on this planet, 75 percent of which are in wildlife. Many of the dangerous ones (SARS, MERS, Ebola, rabies, etc.) have been identified in bats and are readily transmitted to humans, possibly through another vector such as snakes. There is lack of agreement on the specific source of this one.
Is it waterborne?
COVID-19 is spread through respiration from the lungs. Diseases such as salmonellosis and cryptosporidiosis result from eating or drinking but the experts do not feel that COVID-19 can be spread that way. In other words, we catch this disease from inhaling, not from eating or drinking. The World Health Organization (WHO) issued a March 19 Interim Guidance wherein they state: "Although persistence in drinking water is possible, there is no evidence from surrogate human coronaviruses that they are present in surface or groundwater sources or transmitted through contaminated drinking water. The COVID-19 virus is an enveloped virus with a fragile outer membrane. Generally, enveloped viruses are less stable in the environment and are more susceptible to oxidants, such as chlorine."
The virtually ubiquitous practice of chlorinating municipal drinking-water supplies in the US has reinforced the conclusion that this virus will not survive in drinking water. This document goes on to state: "Heat, high or low pH, sunlight, and common disinfectants (such as chlorine) all facilitate die off. In centralized water treatment applications, WHO specifies a free-chlorine concentration of equal or greater than 0.5 mg/L, at least 30 minutes contact time and pH greater than 8.0. For non-centralized applications, in addition to chemical treatment (0.5 percent sodium hypochlorite or equaivalent disinfection), they recommend "... boiling or using high-performing ultrafiltration or nanomembrane filters, solar radiation and, in non-turbid waters, UV irradiation." Based on this, POU RO technology should be effective. All of these assume careful, hygienic handling practice.
This WHO document also states: "There is no evidence that the COVID-19 virus has been transmitted via sewerage systems with or without wastewater treatment. As with other pathogenic viruses , it may be present in sewage, but does not appear to present a greater operational hazardto wastewater plant workers wearing the necessary protective equipment.
So how is it spread?
The bad news is that the COVID-19 virus appears to be transmitted through the air in tiny droplets, typically larger than 5µ. Although the virus itself is extremely small, measureing about 0.1µ, it is readily carried in respiratory droplets. When someone coughs or sneezes, huge quantities of droplets are released. What may not be so obvious is that we spray droplets even by talking (also breathing?). These droplets may be suspended for a long time (hours?) and travel significant distances by air movement. The six-foot rule is just an educated guess and some experts feel it should be much farther, perhaps up to 12 feet.
This underscores the value of face masks. It is suggested that N95 masks be reserved for medical and other personnel in direct contact with infected people. This is good advice, as these masks are manufactured to ensure filtration of at least 95 percent of particles as small as 0.3 microns. The good news is that most droplets containing the virus are much larger than this and, depending on the particular face-mask construction, should be effective at removing these droplets. Even home-made masks constructed from old T-shirts or other cloth will help prevent the wearer from infecting people nearby.
The second pathway of COVID-19 exposure is from surfaces. Experts estimate that the virus is infectious for as much as three hours in droplets, four hours on copper surfaces, 24 hours on cardboard and three days on plastic or stainless steel. Note the antimicrobial credit given to copper, which also includes brass. It also appears to be able to survive on the soles of shoes for up to five days. The SARS-CoV-2 virus will not survive for any length of time outdoors, thanks to the excellent disinfecting properties of UV radiation from sunlight. It appears that UV radiation in the 200 to 222-nm wavelength will effectively inactivate (kill) the virus without harm to human skin. It is also readily inactivated by wiping surfaces with bleach solutions (four teaspoons per one quart of water).
The virus can readily enter the body through mucous membranes around the eyes, nose and throat. It is critically important that we keep the virus particles off our hands (which is why we are inundated with advice regarding hand-washing) and to avoid touching our face. If you think of this virus as sitting on everything you touch, that should be motivation to constantly wash. The experts tell us that the optimum procedure is with soap and water (for 20 seconds) and that hand sanitizer (minimum alcohol concentration of 60 percent) should be used only is soap and water are not available.
Facts and fallacies
As with anything so dominant in the news and on social today, there is a plethora of misinformation circulating. The list below presents some of these along with the truth as provided by respectable authorities.
- The virus that causes COVID-19 is more deadly than any other pathogen. The data so far indicate the fatality rate at one to three percent; SARS was 11 percent and MERS was 34 percent.
- Getting COVID-19 is a death sentence. 80 percent of those infected have mild symptoms and get well.
- This disease is less deadly than the flu. COVID-19 appears to be more deadly than the seasonal flu.
- The virus that causes COVID-19 is the most infectious pathogen. Pathogens that cause measles, polio, diphtheria and whooping cough are more contagious.
- Pneumonia and flu vaccinations will protect you from COVID-19. No, they won’t.
- Antibiotics will work. These are only for bacterial infections and will not work on viruses.
- Sipping water every 15 minutes will prevent infection. Absolutely will not work.
- Taking garlic, ibuprofen, echinacea, vitamin C, zinc, elderberry juice, green tea, steroids and other home remedies. There is no evidence that any of these will prevent infection or lessen the symptoms.
- Hand dryers will kill this virus. No.
- Either cold or hot weather will kill it. No evidence to support this.
- Hot baths will prevent infection. No.
- It can be transmitted through mosquito bites. No evidence to support this.
- If you cannot hold your breath for 10 seconds without coughing, you have COVID-19. This is not true.
- Wash your hands with antibacterial soap. While hand washing with soap is absolutely the best way to remove the virus from your skin, the antibacterial ingredient is considered ineffective and is actually a significant pollutant in water supplies.
And the future?
Unfortunately, without much more testing, it will be virtually impossible for the experts to gain the critical knowledge necessary to trace this pandemic and make informed decisions about when and how we can return to some semblance of normalcy. Will recovered patients be immune to reinfection? For how long? Will blood plasma containing antibodies from these people help those with COVID-19 disease recover more quickly? When flu season comes this fall, will COVID-19 come back with a vengeance? Unanswered questions.
At the time of this writing, there is an antiviral drug, Remdesivir, which has shown promise in small studies and has been approved for treatment in hospital settings. Another one, Leronlimab also appears promising in limited trials. Meanwhile, there are at least 70 drugs under development globally, including vaccines from Oxford University and China, as well as those under development by Bointech/Pfizer and Moderna. In the meantime, we owe it to ourselves and loved ones to maintain a healthy lifestyle and outlook, both physically and mentally. The byword today is stay safe—we will get through this if we all work together!
|
How Modern Wastewater Treatment Changed our World
Without wastewater treatment, diseases and infections would ravage our society.
by Trevor English
|
Wastewater treatment is often an overlooked necessity of civilization. Without proper sewer systems, wastewater treatment plants, and overall regulation, our cities would be ripe with disease and human waste everywhere.
Believe it or not, much of the modern wastewater management technology we consider standard in any 21st century home, things like toilets and sewer pipes, are actually relatively new in the grand scheme of history.
The history of wastewater treatment
That’s not to say that sewer systems haven’t been around for ages. After all, the ancient Romans had a complex system of sewers at the peak of their empire. Rather, the knowledge of how poorly managed wastewater can drastically impact the health of society is relatively new.
The Romans had a centralized sewage management system, although it was fairly rudimentary by today’s standards. Open and closed ditches and pipes would carry away excrement and trash, primarily using rainwater runoff. The contaminated water would then flow into large concrete tanks that let the sewage settle out before the water was allowed to flow into the nearby rivers. There was indoor plumbing, and public latrines were also built over the sewers.
In medieval Europe, closed sewers, stone conduits, or ditches were used to drain sewage away from residential areas, often in conjunction with septic tanks, but chamber pots were often dumped directly onto the streets. Between 1858 and 1859 the Thames in London was chock full of untreated wastewater, which combined with very hot weather to cause what became known as “the Great Stink“.
The 17th and 18th centuries saw a rapid expansion in waterworks and pumping systems, but the Industrial Revolution led to even more rapid growth of cities and pollution, which acted as a constant source for the outbreak of deadly diseases like cholera and typhoid.
As cities grew in the 19th century, increasing public health concerns led to the development of municipal sanitation programs and the construction of sewer systems in many cities. These systems often discharged sewage directly into rivers without treatment, but by the late 19th century, chemical treatments and sedimentation systems were in use in many cities.
The construction of centralized sewage treatment plants began between the late 19th and early 20th centuries. These systems passed sewage through a combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes to remove pollutants. Also beginning in the 1900s, new sewage-collection systems were designed to separate storm-water from domestic wastewater, to prevent treatment plants from becoming overloaded during heavy rains.
In the 1910s and 20s, engineers developed more sophisticated systems to treat drinking water before it was supplied to residents in cities.
Stepping back for a moment and examining the timeline here, we can begin to understand just how recent effective wastewater treatment on a grand scale appeared. Roughly 150 years ago was the first few centralized instances of water treatment for cities. It would take decades for more rigid practices to emerge.
In 1972, the Clean Water Act was passed in the United States. Up until this point, sewage treatment for some cities still relied on chemical treatment and filtration, and the treated sewage was often dumped into rivers and streams. There was little in the way of pretreatment of industrial wastewater to prevent toxic chemicals from interfering with the biological processes used at sewage treatment plants.
After the passage of the Clean Water Act, cities started a process known as secondary treatment, which removes all the pollutant organic materials from the effluent. Wastewater with high concentrations of organic materials and nutrients being dumped into rivers was causing algal blooms and the bacteria growth, which created dead zones in rivers. The secondary treatment essentially eradicates the effluent of microorganisms and organics so that when it’s discharged, it has little effect on the surrounding environment.
To think, just 50 years ago many communities in the world were dumping mostly untreated sewage into rivers.
Wastewater treatment processes have really experienced their most rapid growth in the last 30 or so years, now with every planned municipality in the world having some form of a centralized wastewater management system. It’s all at a hefty cost too – on the scale of billions and billions of dollars.
Now, however, we can flush our toilets and shower without really having to worry about what’s happening to all that dirty water. It gets handled by trusty wastewater treatment plant operators before being discharged into local rivers and lakes. “Oh, and what happens to all the solids from wastewater?” you might wonder. Well in some cases, wastewater treatment plants will let it dry, package it up and sell it as fertilizer to help supplement the hefty costs of running a treatment plant.
In other cases, some plants will use the sludge to produce methane, which they will then burn for power or sell. Wastewater treatment today uses science and engineering, though it is still a little bit smelly. We suppose it comes with the territory.
Now that we understand just how recently our knowledge of sanitation when it comes to human waste has emerged, let’s take a closer look at exactly how wastewater treatment plants work.
Read the full article here.
|
How Eating Beef Causes Water Shortages
by Peter Chawaga
Gazette Introductory Note: It isn’t uncommon when a “recent scientific analysis” discovers something that has been common knowledge for decades. In this case, what has just been discovered is that raising cattle for food is an environmental disaster. In addition to the twenty-fold waste of water (as compared with direct human consumption of plants), there is an equally significant amount of water pollution that goes with animal agriculture. When your city water supplier puts the familiar list of water saving tips (like, don’t run water continually while you brush your teeth) in with your utility bill, the list almost never includes real water saving tips like “stop eating pigs and cows.”
|
Persistent water stress throughout much of the U.S. is linked to multiple causes, including climate change that is warming temperatures and growing populations that put additional strain on available source water. And now, a recent scientific analysis is pointing the finger at another culprit: the cattle industry.
A scientific study published in Nature suggests that cattle are one of the major drivers of water shortages, primarily because of the water required to grow the crops that feed them.
“Across the U.S., cattle-feed crops, which end up as beef and dairy products, account for 23% of all water consumption,” The Guardian reported in a summary of the study. “In the Colorado River Basin, it is over half.”
The Colorado River Basin services some 40 million people in seven states, and is so overdrawn that it rarely reaches the ocean as it once did regularly, per the report. But it is far from alone as a drought-stricken water source in the country. Lake Mead, as another example, hasn’t been full since 1983 and has been reduced by nearly two-thirds over the last 20 years — and almost 75 percent of that decline has been caused by cattle-feed irrigation, the study found.
“It takes a lot of water to make a double-cheeseburger,” according to The Guardian, as it framed the impact in a way many Americans may better understand. “One calculation puts it at 450 gallons per quarter-pounder. The study also found that most of the water-intensive beef and dairy products are being consumed in western cities.”
For those who are concerned about rising source-water scarcity, it’s clear that new solutions and changes to old behavior are needed. The researcher behind the study proposed that leaving farmland idle without irrigation, a practice known as “fallowing,” may be needed.
“[The researcher] noted that the strategy should be temporary and rotational, and that ranchers should be compensated because they lose income growing nothing,” per The Guardian. “Fallowing is at least twice as effective as other water-saving tactics, according to [the] analysis.”
Plant-based meat alternatives may also help with growing source-water scarcity, as consuming less beef and dairy may be the only real solution to this growing stress on the water supply. A meatless Beyond Burger generates 90 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions and has almost no impact on water scarcity, according to the report summary.
|
Introductory Note by Gene Franks:
Chloramine is not new. It has been used as a disinfectant in US water supplies since the 1920s.
Nevertheless, when cities contemplate the change from chlorine to chloramine as their water disinfectant, there is usually controversy, sometimes heated. The change to chloramine is very important to aquarium owners, to beer and bread makers, to dialysis clinics, and to the small percentage of people whose skin or respiratory system seems to be especially sensitive to chloramine. There are also plumbing issues to be considered. Chloramine is often blamed for leaks in copper pipes. To water treatment dealers, chloramine represents a challenge, since it is considerably more difficult to remove than chlorine.
Since people usually form opinions based on how an issue affects them personally, I thought it would be good to reprint a chloramine article that looks at the issue from a different angle. The piece reprinted below, in slightly truncated form, concerns the decision being considered in Marion, Ohio about whether to switch to chloramines or to seek out a completely different substitute for chlorine. As you will note, and the most outspoken opponents of chloramine usually ignore this, the option to stick with chlorine as usual is actually not an option for the city because sticking with the status quo has already been vetoed by the EPA. The city’s water has been found to be in violation of EPA standards, so a change is required. In the article below, Aqua Ohio, the water supplier for the city, is getting pressure from several sources.
(Note that the terms “chloramine” and the plural “chloramines” are often used interchangeably. This is because although “monochloramine” is usually the water treatment product, chloramine actually exists in other forms, depending on water conditions such as pH.)
Chloramines: Best option?
MARION — City Council asked Aqua Ohio to come up with alternative methods to using chloramines in the local water supply, but the company maintains that chloramines are the best option.
Council will hear from Aqua officials and the general public after the regularly-scheduled meeting. Aqua has met with the county commissioners and with City Council in the past. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency will address the municipal services committee.
Chlorine disinfection has been used in the US since 1904, and chloramination is almost as old.
Council drafted a 45-day moratorium and gave it a first reading two weeks ago, in case Aqua did not comply with the wishes of council or the public. Council would issue a $10,000 fine for every day that Aqua put chloramines into the water if the moratorium were to go into effect.
Ed Kolodziej, the president and Chief Operating Officer of Aqua Ohio, said his company would have to “make a choice” if it came down to abiding by council’s ordinance or by federal regulations.
Chloramines are created when ammonia reacts with chlorine in the water. Aqua planned to switch the treatment process for Marion water from chlorine to a two-step process of chlorine and chloramines. Tom Schwing, Aqua Ohio’s environmental safety and compliance manager, said this is to stay in compliance with Ohio Environmental Protection Agency regulations.
According to the EPA, chlorine alone forms many byproducts, including trihalomethanes (THMs) and haloacetic acids (HAAs). Some THMs are carcinogens. The EPA wants water systems to measure the output of these byproducts every quarter. In the past, Schwing said, the EPA averaged all the separate test sites together to see how many THMs and HAAs are in the water. Now, the EPA will look at how many of these byproducts are at each individual site, and keep a running average over the last four quarters.
Some of the Marion areas are at risk of going over the EPA’s limit, Schwing said, so Aqua needs to find a sanitation method that keeps the water cleaner for longer periods of time while it is in the pipes.
Chloramine forms a lower level of THMs and HAAs, but it has some health risks, according to the EPA. People on dialysis and people with fish tanks should not use chloraminated water because the ammonia is harmful when inserted directly in the bloodstream.
People from across the country have reported negative effects of chloramines, from skin rashes and respiratory problems to damage in their house’s pipes. Several groups have been established to combat the use of chloramines. Aqua said there have been no studies proving that chloramines cause any negative effects, but a group of Marion residents and some members of local government are worried about the chemicals’ potential to harm.
Other options
Kolodziej and Tom Schwing, Aqua Ohio’s environmental safety and compliance manager, said chloramines are the most cost-effective option for staying in the EPA’s guidelines.
Of the available water treatment options, they said, three would work in Marion and would reduce the harmful byproducts in the water. One is chloramines, one is a granular-activated carbon (GAC) filtration system, and one is an ozonation and biological filtration process.
Kolodziej said chloramines are a smaller capital investment, and they cost consumers less. He said the addition of chloramines to the water would be an 80 cent increase per month on customers’ water bills, and the other two options would be upwards of $13 per month. Building a facility for chloramines would cost Aqua about $790,000 and preparing the system for the other two options would be about $10 million each, he said.
Schwing said Aqua’s other facilities, such as the ones near Lake Erie, draw water from cleaner sources and can use different methods for keeping the water safe. He said only certain methods work for Marion. He also said that since Marion’s water supply stays in the pipes longer, chloramines will help keep the disinfection byproducts low in the outlying areas.
Schwing said there are downsides to the other methods of disinfection, and that Aqua would have to pay for testing and construction before implementing new methods. The chloramination equipment is currently under construction at the plant.
GAC filters can prevent or remove the disinfection byproducts, and would absorb any bad biomaterial, according to the Siemens water technologies website. Ozonation would take this process a step further by injecting ozone into the water before running it through a GAC filter or another biological filter. According to Ozone Technology, Inc., ozonation will react with the water and increase the effectiveness of the biofilters downstream.
Editor’s Note: The Marion Star article ends with a long list of cities in Ohio and worldwide that use chloramine and a long list of cities that don’t. This 2013 article presents the pros and cons of a controversy that hasn’t changed much. More and more cities are switching to chloramine but the controversy goes on. The switch is not always controversial. Our local water department has used chloramine for many years and most of our local customers, even the most health conscious, call it “chlorine” and are not even aware of the issue. From a treatment perspective, chloramine is harder to remove than chlorine, but by no means impossible to treat. The sticky issue is, what happens to the ammonia?
Here’s a list of Pure Water Gazette articles that will tell you more than you want to know about chloramines. I especially recommend Chloramine Removal for which Emily McBroom and I spent several months of Saturdays testing a variety of real water treatment devices for chloramine/ammonia removal.
|
Places to visit for additional information:
|
Thanks for reading and be sure to check out the next Occasional!
|
|
|
|  | |
