" A bill about to hit the House -- proposed by the EPA, no less -- would allow undertreated sewage to be discharged right into your water source. Is it time to stock up on bottled water?"
http://www.tompaine.com/uncommonsense/index.php#4938
Definitely Don't Drink The Water
While those of us living in the District of Columbia were worried about lead in our drinking water last year, there's now cause for concern about the safety of drinking water on a much larger scale. Probably this week, the House will vote on a new "Clean Water Act" which would relax the strict standards that keep sewage out of our drinking water. That's right. Let it sink in for a minute. Still thirsty?
The act, proposed by the EPA, would give sewage treatment plants greater leeway to discharge inadequately treated sewage into waterways during heavy rainstorms and other weather events. This mostly untreated sewage would mix with treated sewage coming from the plants and be discharged back into waterways. Because the process mixes sewage that's been treated to remove biological contaminants (read: viruses, bacteria, intestinal worms, antibiotics, industrial waste, etc.) with untreated sewage, it's given the euphemistic name "blending."
The original problem is that our sewage infrastructure—the pipes and drains and processing plants that clean our water and remove pathogens—is aging and falling into disrepair. In situations like rainstorms and flooding, all that extra water can't be processed. But rather than paying for upgrades to these important systems (Hey! Yet another domestic problem that could be easily solved with a few billion of that Iraq money!) the sewage guys at the EPA have convinced the Bush administration that blending is a better, cheaper alternative. But more than 8 million Americans already are made ill each year from polluted water. When you consider the health care implications and economic implications that arise if blending becomes standard practice, paying for those sewer upgrades starts to look more affordable.
The good news is that a group of Congress members has introduced a bill, H.R. 1126, called the Save Our Waters from Sewage Act. Take action with the League of Conservation Voters and urge your representatives to support H.R. 1126. Then go have a nice big glass of water while you're still confident that it's clean.
--Laura Donnelly | Wednesday 5:11 PM
Full Version: "Definitely Don't Drink The Water"
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Energy Independence, Environment, Science and Technology > Energy, Environment, Science and Technology Issues Archive
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site...210&lftnav=home
ENVIRO – YOUR ICED TEA SHOULD'T BE THAT BROWN: "It doesn't take a medical degree to know that drinking poop is bad for us," writes Jeffrey Griffiths, a member of the EPA's National Drinking Water Advisory Council, in the Boston Globe. That hasn't stopped the Bush administration from proposing a new policy that "would allow sewage treatment plants to discharge inadequately treated human waste into lakes, rivers, streams, and coastal waters," which ends up in our tap water. Sure, pathogens from human waste can harm people in even small doses – particularly children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems. But the administration thinks that by weakening sewage restrictions, it can save a few bucks and "further defer or avoid maintenance, or improvements, to their sewer and rainfall collection systems." There's no way we're drinking to that.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...ink_the_sewage/
JEFFREY K. GRIFFITHS
Don't drink the sewage
By Jeffrey K. Griffiths | May 18, 2005
IT DOESN'T TAKE a medical degree to know that drinking poop is bad for us. For centuries, we have protected ourselves from waterborne plagues by keeping human waste out of our water. Why, then, would the Environmental Protection Agency propose a new policy that would allow sewage treatment plants to discharge inadequately treated human waste into lakes, rivers, streams, and coastal waters?
ADVERTISEMENT
The Clean Water Act generally prohibits sewage treatment plants from discharging partially treated waste into our waterways. Sewage is normally treated by settling out solid materials, and then through a biological process that kills pathogens.
Both treatments are necessary to kill the full spectrum of viruses, bacteria, and parasites in sewage. Both are needed to minimize the risks to people downstream, and both are required by law.
The EPA's proposal would allow sewage to be dumped into waterways more often without biological treatment, which EPA calls ''blending" because the largely untreated sewage is mixed with treated sewage before it is discharged.
Many older communities, particularly in the Northeast and Great Lakes, have combined sewage and stormwater pipes. Heavy rainfall can overwhelm their sewage treatment capacity, leading to sewage spills. The Clean Water Act requires these communities to work toward a long-term goal of providing full treatment for sewage under all but extreme weather events.
The EPA's proposal would take them off course by allowing discharges of largely untreated, settled but not biologically treated sewage whenever it rains, rather than as an exception. In other words, this bad but occasionally necessary practice would become more widespread instead of increasingly rare.
Over the past 30 years we have identified many germs, such as cryptosporidium and giardia, that can infect us even if we drink a tiny number of them. By skipping full treatment, many will survive to infect us later.
Clear, scientifically credible information shows that blending sewage lets enough of these germs into our water so that the risks are increased. These pathogens can infect all of us, but are of particular concern to children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems.
No water treatment process is absolutely reliable at removing pathogens. Polluting drinking water sources with sewage is just increasing the odds that something will slip through the treatment plant to cause waterborne disease outbreaks. There is just no escaping the fact that blended sewage releases will increase the number of live, ready-to-infect-you pathogens in our drinking and recreational waters.
Sewage treatment not only protects our drinking water and swimming sites, it also protects businesses like the shellfish industry. Shellfish are filter feeders, and must be protected from human wastes or else they will concentrate human pathogens in their tissues. Sewage blending will increase shellfish bed closings, drive shellfish growers out of business, and increase the health risks to the population from eating shellfish.
The arguments for sewage ''blending" are short-sighted and not persuasive. The proponents of sewage blending are mainly focused on the cost savings they anticipate from using blending to further defer or avoid maintenance, or improvements, to their sewer and rainfall collection systems through this policy.
While I sympathize with these towns regarding finances, these infrastructure challenges should not be met by weakening public health protections. The Clean Water Act already allows sewage blending that cannot be avoided despite the use of best practices for maximizing treatment.
Instead of weakening requirements to upgrade and repair wastewater infrastructure, the problem should be met by dealing with the underlying needs to treat sewage and to channel rainwater in a responsible, cost-effective manner. The EPA's ''solution" effectively legalizes the problem and undermines three decades of progress in cleaning up lakes, rivers, and coastal waters.
Congress is about to vote on a measure that would block EPA from allowing sewage blending.
We should remind our elected officials that we want less, not more, sewage in the water.
Jeffrey K. Griffiths is an associate professor of public health and family medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine. He is a member of the US EPA's National Drinking Water Advisory Council and its Science Advisory Board.
ENVIRO – YOUR ICED TEA SHOULD'T BE THAT BROWN: "It doesn't take a medical degree to know that drinking poop is bad for us," writes Jeffrey Griffiths, a member of the EPA's National Drinking Water Advisory Council, in the Boston Globe. That hasn't stopped the Bush administration from proposing a new policy that "would allow sewage treatment plants to discharge inadequately treated human waste into lakes, rivers, streams, and coastal waters," which ends up in our tap water. Sure, pathogens from human waste can harm people in even small doses – particularly children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems. But the administration thinks that by weakening sewage restrictions, it can save a few bucks and "further defer or avoid maintenance, or improvements, to their sewer and rainfall collection systems." There's no way we're drinking to that.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...ink_the_sewage/
JEFFREY K. GRIFFITHS
Don't drink the sewage
By Jeffrey K. Griffiths | May 18, 2005
IT DOESN'T TAKE a medical degree to know that drinking poop is bad for us. For centuries, we have protected ourselves from waterborne plagues by keeping human waste out of our water. Why, then, would the Environmental Protection Agency propose a new policy that would allow sewage treatment plants to discharge inadequately treated human waste into lakes, rivers, streams, and coastal waters?
ADVERTISEMENT
The Clean Water Act generally prohibits sewage treatment plants from discharging partially treated waste into our waterways. Sewage is normally treated by settling out solid materials, and then through a biological process that kills pathogens.
Both treatments are necessary to kill the full spectrum of viruses, bacteria, and parasites in sewage. Both are needed to minimize the risks to people downstream, and both are required by law.
The EPA's proposal would allow sewage to be dumped into waterways more often without biological treatment, which EPA calls ''blending" because the largely untreated sewage is mixed with treated sewage before it is discharged.
Many older communities, particularly in the Northeast and Great Lakes, have combined sewage and stormwater pipes. Heavy rainfall can overwhelm their sewage treatment capacity, leading to sewage spills. The Clean Water Act requires these communities to work toward a long-term goal of providing full treatment for sewage under all but extreme weather events.
The EPA's proposal would take them off course by allowing discharges of largely untreated, settled but not biologically treated sewage whenever it rains, rather than as an exception. In other words, this bad but occasionally necessary practice would become more widespread instead of increasingly rare.
Over the past 30 years we have identified many germs, such as cryptosporidium and giardia, that can infect us even if we drink a tiny number of them. By skipping full treatment, many will survive to infect us later.
Clear, scientifically credible information shows that blending sewage lets enough of these germs into our water so that the risks are increased. These pathogens can infect all of us, but are of particular concern to children, the elderly, and people with compromised immune systems.
No water treatment process is absolutely reliable at removing pathogens. Polluting drinking water sources with sewage is just increasing the odds that something will slip through the treatment plant to cause waterborne disease outbreaks. There is just no escaping the fact that blended sewage releases will increase the number of live, ready-to-infect-you pathogens in our drinking and recreational waters.
Sewage treatment not only protects our drinking water and swimming sites, it also protects businesses like the shellfish industry. Shellfish are filter feeders, and must be protected from human wastes or else they will concentrate human pathogens in their tissues. Sewage blending will increase shellfish bed closings, drive shellfish growers out of business, and increase the health risks to the population from eating shellfish.
The arguments for sewage ''blending" are short-sighted and not persuasive. The proponents of sewage blending are mainly focused on the cost savings they anticipate from using blending to further defer or avoid maintenance, or improvements, to their sewer and rainfall collection systems through this policy.
While I sympathize with these towns regarding finances, these infrastructure challenges should not be met by weakening public health protections. The Clean Water Act already allows sewage blending that cannot be avoided despite the use of best practices for maximizing treatment.
Instead of weakening requirements to upgrade and repair wastewater infrastructure, the problem should be met by dealing with the underlying needs to treat sewage and to channel rainwater in a responsible, cost-effective manner. The EPA's ''solution" effectively legalizes the problem and undermines three decades of progress in cleaning up lakes, rivers, and coastal waters.
Congress is about to vote on a measure that would block EPA from allowing sewage blending.
We should remind our elected officials that we want less, not more, sewage in the water.
Jeffrey K. Griffiths is an associate professor of public health and family medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine. He is a member of the US EPA's National Drinking Water Advisory Council and its Science Advisory Board.
Bush to American people..........Drink crap and die.
Radical clerics announce scripture backs this policy.
Radical clerics announce scripture backs this policy.
QUOTE(Cloudy @ May 19 2005, 12:04 PM)
Bush to American people..........Drink crap and die.
Radical clerics announce scripture backs this policy.
Radical clerics announce scripture backs this policy.
Who could possibly be behind a policy such as this?
Is there a lobby from the bottled water companies that have bought themselves a few politicians?
It will be good for there business when people find out about the poop in their water.
Aren't these guys on the side of the American people in any way, shape or form?
Is there a lobby from the bottled water companies that have bought themselves a few politicians?
It will be good for there business when people find out about the poop in their water.
Aren't these guys on the side of the American people in any way, shape or form?
EPA FLUSHES SEWAGE DUMPING PLAN - The Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday that it will dump its much-criticized proposal to allow municipal sewage agencies to release partially treated sewage during wet weather.
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publ...icle_6747.shtml
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publ...icle_6747.shtml
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.