Taylor Made Water Systems

Legal But Unhealthy Water

The New York Times is taking a deep look at tap water through a series of articles examining various aspects of tap water, pollution, and related issues.  The following article looks at the 35 year old Safe Drinking Water Act, which regulates 91 contaminates in our tap water.  The basic premise of the article is that with over 60,000 chemicals in use in the U.S., the number of regulated contaminants is inadequate and leading to “legal” water that still presents serious health risks.

My two favorite lines from the article:

    • Dr. Parekh has struggled to make his case. “People don’t understand that just because water is technically legal, it can still present health risks,” he said. (Yikes!)
    • “They supposedly discovered these chemicals, and then they ruined the reservoir by putting black pimples all over it,” said Laurie Pepper, whose home overlooks the manmade lake (this line is funnier when read in the context of the article). 

So, what’s the solution?  Black balls on reservoirs to block sunlight, thereby preventing some contaminants from converting to “likely” cancer causing agents?  I cannot believe this was actually done.  Thrown around in a brainstorming session?  Sure.  Drawn up on a cocktail napkin?  Absolutely?  But, workers actually dumped a bunch of balls into a real live reservoir. Wow.   I am not saying that it cannot work.  It may even be the best solution.  I just can’t believe it was actually done.

As for the solution, you cannot regulate and test for 60,000 chemicals. Plus, many of those chemicals are likely not harmful.  But, as the article states there are many harmful chemicals that are not regulated.  And some of the maximum “legal” limits for certain chemicals still allow a harmful level of contaminants in our drinking water.  Eliminating all of these chemicals entirely would be cost prohibitive and unnecessary.  As I’ve mentioned many times, the great majority of tap water is not used for drinking water, but for irrigation, toilets, showers, laundry, etc.  To me, calling tap water “drinking water” is misleading as it presumes all tap water will be consumed when that is clearly not the case.  In my mind, the municipalities should deliver us good, safe “tap water” and those of us who want a higher standard for the relatively tiny percentage that is consumed as “drinking water” should treat it ourselves.  If a technology comes along to purify all tap water to drinking water standards that is not cost prohibitive, that would be great.  But, until then, a small investment in a quality reverse osmosis unit is a pretty good bet. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/17/us/17water.html?_r=1&sudsredirect=true

Toxic Waters

That Tap Water Is Legal but May Be Unhealthy

Irfan Khan/The Los Angeles Times, via Associated Press

This Los Angeles reservoir contained chemicals that sunlight converted to compounds associated with cancer. The city used plastic balls to block the sun, but nearby homeowners asked why, if the water didn’t violate the law.

By CHARLES DUHIGG

Published: December 16, 2009

The 35-year-old federal law regulating tap water is so out of date that the water Americans drink can pose what scientists say are serious health risks — and still be legal.

Toxic Waters

Outdated Laws

Articles in this series are examining the worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.

What’s in Your Water

The data was collected by an advocacy organization, the Environmental Working Group, who shared it with The Times.  Only 91 contaminants are regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act, yet more than 60,000 chemicals are used within the United States, according to Environmental Protection Agency estimates. Government and independent scientists have scrutinized thousands of those chemicals in recent decades, and identified hundreds associated with a risk of cancer and other diseases at small concentrations in drinking water, according to an analysis of government records by The New York Times.

But not one chemical has been added to the list of those regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act since 2000.

Other recent studies have found that even some chemicals regulated by that law pose risks at much smaller concentrations than previously known. However, many of the act’s standards for those chemicals have not been updated since the 1980s, and some remain essentially unchanged since the law was passed in 1974.

All told, more than 62 million Americans have been exposed since 2004 to drinking water that did not meet at least one commonly used government health guideline intended to help protect people from cancer or serious disease, according to an analysis by The Times of more than 19 million drinking-water test results from the District of Columbia and the 45 states that made data available.

In some cases, people have been exposed for years to water that did not meet those guidelines.

But because such guidelines were never incorporated into the Safe Drinking Water Act, the vast majority of that water never violated the law.

Some officials overseeing local water systems have tried to go above and beyond what is legally required. But they have encountered resistance, sometimes from the very residents they are trying to protect, who say that if their water is legal it must be safe.

Dr. Pankaj Parekh, director of the water quality division for the City of Los Angeles, has faced such criticism. The water in some city reservoirs has contained contaminants that become likely cancer-causing compounds when exposed to sunlight.

To stop the carcinogens from forming, the city covered the surface of reservoirs, including one in the upscale neighborhood of Silver Lake, with a blanket of black plastic balls that blocked the sun.

Then complaints started from owners of expensive houses around the reservoir. “They supposedly discovered these chemicals, and then they ruined the reservoir by putting black pimples all over it,” said Laurie Pepper, whose home overlooks the manmade lake. “If the water is so dangerous, why can’t they tell us what laws it’s violated?”

Dr. Parekh has struggled to make his case. “People don’t understand that just because water is technically legal, it can still present health risks,” he said. “And so we encounter opposition that can become very personal.”

Some federal regulators have tried to help officials like Dr. Parekh by pushing to tighten drinking water standards for chemicals like industrial solvents, as well as a rocket fuel additive that has polluted drinking water sources in Southern California and elsewhere. But those efforts have often been blocked by industry lobbying.

Drinking water that does not meet a federal health guideline will not necessarily make someone ill. Many contaminants are hazardous only if consumed for years. And some researchers argue that even toxic chemicals, when consumed at extremely low doses over long periods, pose few risks. Others argue that the cost of removing minute concentrations of chemicals from drinking water does not equal the benefits.

Moreover, many of the thousands of chemicals that have not been analyzed may be harmless. And researchers caution that such science is complicated, often based on extrapolations from animal studies, and sometimes hard to apply nationwide, particularly given that more than 57,400 water systems in this country each deliver, essentially, a different glass of water every day.

Government scientists now generally agree, however, that many chemicals commonly found in drinking water pose serious risks at low concentrations.

And independent studies in such journals as Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology; Environmental Health Perspectives; American Journal of Public Health; and Archives of Environmental and Occupational Health, as well as reports published by the National Academy of Sciences, suggest that millions of Americans become sick each year from drinking contaminated water, with maladies from upset stomachs to cancer and birth defects.

More…

December 21, 2009 at 3:06 pm Comments (0)

DMZ Water – Some Danger in your Bottled Water

Ignoring the land minds and decades of tension, apparently the DMZ (the stretch of “demilitarized” land between North and South Korea) is the source of “pristene” water as its been left alone since 1953.  Proving that no water is out of bounds for the ever growing number of bottling companies, DMZ water is selling throughout Korea and the company is considering exporting. 

http://www.watertechonline.com/news.asp?N_ID=73068

World’s most dangerous bottled water source

Tuesday, December 08, 2009

CAMP RED CLOUD, SOUTH KOREA — Many water bottlers draw their raw water from pristine places, but only one has a very hazardous source — the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) separating North Korea and South Korea, according to a December 1 article in Stars and Stripes.

Lotte Chilsung Co., a bottler in South Korea, is now drawing water from beneath the DMZ for its operation, after having obtained special permission from the South Korea Ministry of Defense to set up a pumping operation, reported Stars and Stripes, a newspaper circulated to the US military.

Because the DMZ has been in a totally natural state since the end of the Korean War in 1953, its ecosystem “is the best in the world,” claims Chun Woo-chul, a spokesman for the company. Sprinkled with land mines, heavily fortified and considered one of the most dangerous places on Earth, the DMZ is a strip of land 2.5 miles wide and 155 miles long, the article says.

For the past three months, the company has been producing and selling its “DMZ” brand of bottled water, sales of which have been good throughout Korea, Chun was quoted saying in the article. He said the company is thinking about exporting the brand.

Naturalists have previously noted the abundance and variety of wildlife and plant species that thrive in the DMZ. Chun said company officials at first were concerned that a “DMZ” brand might have negative connotations due to the continuing tensions between the two Koreas, but apparently many bottled water consumers also know the zone is untouched by human hands.

 

Thirsty after that run? Why not down a DMZ?

By Jon Rabiroff and Hwang Hae-rym, Stars and Stripes
Pacific edition, Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Jon Rabiroff/Stars and Stripes

The makers of DMZ bottled water hope the name conjures up images of the natural beauty of Korea’s Demilitarized Zone and not the danger and tension.

CAMP RED CLOUD, South Korea — After a long run or grueling workout, U.S. service members around South Korea will now be able to reach for a refreshing bottle of “DMZ” brand natural mineral water.

That’s right, bottled water named after the Demilitarized Zone — one of the most dangerous places on the planet, known for its land mines and the ongoing tension between North and South Korea.

Chun Woo-chul, spokesman for the Lotte Chilsung Co., which distributes the water nationwide, conceded that company officials “had fears and concerns about the negative image many people have of the DMZ, such as heightened tensions and conflict between the two Koreas, war, division, lethal mines and how the area is heavily fortified.”

However, he said, surveys showed that more people had a positive image of how the DMZ’s “ecosystem is the best in the world, that has been left untouched by humans for the past 50 years.”

“We decided there was no better name than (Lotte Icis) DMZ 2km to pinpoint the purity and cleanness of this water,” Chun said.

Indeed, ecologists consider the DMZ one of the most important natural areas in the world thanks to the fact that the strip — which is 2.5 miles wide and runs 155 miles from coast to coast — has been left unspoiled by humans since hostilities ended in 1953.

Chun said the name on the bottles is more than a marketing ploy. The water is drawn from inside the DMZ (the “2km” on the label) and bottled nearby, he said. In fact, the company needed special permission from the South Korea Ministry of National Defense to set up its pumping operation.

The DMZ water has been on the market for about three months, and sales have been so good company officials are talking about possibly distributing it overseas.

“Reaction has been good and hot,” Chun said. “We are so proud of the quality of this water drawn from an area where nature has been left undisturbed.”

December 14, 2009 at 2:09 pm Comments (0)

20 Percent of US Water Violates Safe Drinking Water Act

 

Okay, so that is pretty alarming.  Twenty percent is a significant figure.  According to the New York Times, this figure includes only significant violations, not paperwork or minor problems.  One in five of our water treatment systems have violated our own Drinking Water standards for “Safe” water.  Yikes!

Here are some highlights of what they found in water data since 2004:

  • Over 3 million Americans were exposed to illegal levels of arsenic and radioactive contaminants through their tap water
    • Arsenic Standards:  “A system could deliver tap water that puts residents at a 1-in-600 risk of developing bladder cancer from arsenic, and still comply with the law.”  Double Yikes!
  • In NY, over 200 water systems delivered illegal levels of bacteria in their tap water.
  • Up to “19 million Americans may become ill each year due to just the parasites, viruses and bacteria in drinking water” 

The politicians will continue to point fingers to deflect blame and while they do, very little will change.  The US does need to address its water issues and a serious effort will be required to solve the many issues.  Providing safe drinking water to everyone in the US is no easy task and we realistically cannot expect perfection.  In the meantime, however, I would still suggest taking matters into your own hands and providing your own level of protection with a quality reverse osmosis system.  Yes, self promotion once again, but the New York Times brought it up, not me!

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34323634/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/page/2/

Millions in U.S. drink dirty water, records show

Only 6 percent of systems that broke law since ’04 were fined, punished

By Charles Duhigg

updated 4:48 a.m. PT, Tues., Dec . 8, 2009

More than 20 percent of the nation’s water treatment systems have violated key provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act over the last five years, according to a New York Times analysis of federal data.

That law requires communities to deliver safe tap water to local residents. But since 2004, the water provided to more than 49 million people has contained illegal concentrations of chemicals like arsenic or radioactive substances like uranium, as well as dangerous bacteria often found in sewage.

Regulators were informed of each of those violations as they occurred. But regulatory records show that fewer than 6 percent of the water systems that broke the law were ever fined or punished by state or federal officials, including those at the Environmental Protection Agency, which has ultimate responsibility for enforcing standards.

Studies indicate that drinking water contaminants are linked to millions of instances of illness within the United States each year.

In some instances, drinking water violations were one-time events, and probably posed little risk. But for hundreds of other systems, illegal contamination persisted for years, records show.

‘Top priority’
On Tuesday, the Senate Environment and Public Works committee will question a high-ranking E.P.A. official about the agency’s enforcement of drinking-water safety laws. The E.P.A. is expected to announce a new policy for how it polices the nation’s 54,700 water systems.

“This administration has made it clear that clean water is a top priority,” said an E.P.A. spokeswoman, Adora Andy, in response to questions regarding the agency’s drinking water enforcement. The E.P.A. administrator, Lisa P. Jackson, this year announced a wide-ranging overhaul of enforcement of the Clean Water Act, which regulates pollution into waterways.

“The previous eight years provide a perfect example of what happens when political leadership fails to act to protect our health and the environment,” Ms. Andy added.

Water pollution has become a growing concern for some lawmakers as government oversight of polluters has waned. Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, in 2007 asked the E.P.A. for data on Americans’ exposure to some contaminants in drinking water.

The New York Times has compiled and analyzed millions of records from water systems and regulators around the nation, as part of a series of articles about worsening pollution in American waters, and regulators’ response.

Carcinogens
An analysis of E.P.A. data shows that Safe Drinking Water Act violations have occurred in parts of every state. In the prosperous town of Ramsey, N.J., for instance, drinking water tests since 2004 have detected illegal concentrations of arsenic, a carcinogen, and the dry cleaning solvent tetrachloroethylene, which has also been linked to cancer.

In New York state, 205 water systems have broken the law by delivering tap water that contained illegal amounts of bacteria since 2004.

However, almost none of those systems were ever punished. Ramsey was not fined for its water violations, for example, though a Ramsey official said that filtration systems have been installed since then. In New York, only three water systems were penalized for bacteria violations, according to federal data.

The problem, say current and former government officials, is that enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act has not been a federal priority.

“There is significant reluctance within the E.P.A. and Justice Department to bring actions against municipalities, because there’s a view that they are often cash-strapped, and fines would ultimately be paid by local taxpayers,” said David Uhlmann, who headed the environmental crimes division at the Justice Department until 2007.

“But some systems won’t come into compliance unless they are forced to,” added Mr. Uhlmann, who now teaches at the University of Michigan law school. “And sometimes a court order is the only way to get local governments to spend what is needed.”

A half-dozen current and former E.P.A. officials said in interviews that they tried to prod the agency to enforce the drinking-water law, but found little support.

“I proposed drinking water cases, but they got shut down so fast that I’ve pretty much stopped even looking at the violations,” said one longtime E.P.A. enforcement official who, like others, requested anonymity for fear of reprisals. “The top people want big headlines and million-dollar settlements. That’s not drinking-water cases.”

The majority of drinking water violations since 2004 have occurred at water systems serving fewer than 20,000 residents, where resources and managerial expertise are often in short supply.

It is unclear precisely how many American illnesses are linked to contaminated drinking water. Many of the most dangerous contaminants regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act have been tied to diseases like cancer that can take years to develop.

But scientific research indicates that as many as 19 million Americans may become ill each year due to just the parasites, viruses and bacteria in drinking water. Certain types of cancer — such as breast and prostate cancer — have risen over the past 30 years, and research indicates they are likely tied to pollutants like those found in drinking water.

Informal methods
The violations counted by the Times analysis include only situations where residents were exposed to dangerous contaminants, and exclude violations that involved paperwork or other minor problems.

In response to inquiries submitted by Senator Boxer, the E.P.A. has reported that more than three million Americans have been exposed since 2005 to drinking water with illegal concentrations of arsenic and radioactive elements, both of which have been linked to cancer at small doses.

In some areas, the amount of radium detected in drinking water was 2,000 percent higher than the legal limit, according to E.P.A. data.

But federal regulators fined or punished fewer than 8 percent of water systems that violated the arsenic and radioactive standards. The E.P.A., in a statement, said that in a majority of situations, state regulators used informal methods — like providing technical assistance — to help systems that had violated the rules.

But many systems remained out of compliance, even after aid was offered, according to E.P.A. data. And for over a quarter of systems that violated the arsenic or radioactivity standards, there is no record that they were ever contacted by a regulator, even after they sent in paperwork revealing their violations.

Those figures are particularly worrisome, say researchers, because the Safe Drinking Water Act’s limits on arsenic are so weak to begin with. A system could deliver tap water that puts residents at a 1-in-600 risk of developing bladder cancer from arsenic, and still comply with the law.

Despite the expected announcement of reforms, some mid-level E.P.A. regulators say they are skeptical that any change will occur.

“The same people who told us to ignore Safe Drinking Water Act violations are still running the divisions,” said one mid-level E.P.A. official. “There’s no accountability, and so nothing’s going to change.”


December 8, 2009 at 11:43 am Comments (0)