What's in the water?

Lots of stuff, according to the Environmental Working Group.

The public interest organization has created an online database of water quality test results from 45 states.

The group's analysis of utility information found that water agencies across the country have detected a total of more than 300 pollutants in supplies, more than half of which are not regulated by the government.

"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set enforceable drinking water safety standards for only 114 of the 316 substances detected," the group says in a report released today.

The chemical pollutants that find their way into rivers and aquifers come from various sources, including farm runoff, pesticides, sewage and industrial chemicals. Some are naturally occurring.

The report ranks large utilities according to the quantity and average levels of contaminants, placing three California utilities in the bottom 10: The city of Riverside, the Eastern Municipal Water District in Riverside County, and San Diego.

Kevin Milligan, utilities assistant general manager for Riverside, said: “The bulk of the data they're reporting -- and all that is above [permitted] levels -- is in raw water" that had not been treated. "We have never in our history had a water quality violation.”

He added that the city has spent millions to treat groundwater supplies tainted by military and aerospace operations, as well as agriculture.

A spokesman for the Eastern Municipal Water District also said much of the water quality data from his agency was for untreated supplies. "We don’t feel there's anything in our water supply that we deliver to people that could cause any harm,” Peter Odencrans said.

With increasingly sophisticated testing technology, utilities are turning up chemicals for which there are no government standards.

 “The big question that nobody has answered is what the health risk is, and how would we get it out of the water," Milligan said. "Until we understand those two, there's not a lot we can do."

The report's authors have some suggestions for the federal government: "It should establish new safety standards, set priorities for pollution prevention projects, and tell consumers about the full range of pollutants in their water."

The interactive database, covering 48,000 communities, can be accessed at the group's website, www.ewg.org.

--Bettina Boxall

Photo: Mister Huck squeezes out Rocky Boy for a drink at Runyon Canyon Park in Los Angeles. Credit: Mel Melcon / Los Angeles Times.

Comments

[Donna Hoffman]

Pretty alarming huh? Are those people in charge for providing a safe water supply for the public read these? I hope they are already generating ways on how to address the situation so as not to put their consumer's health and safety at risk.

[Donna Hoffman]

It seems that the water consuming public need to be aware of such information. It is indeed alarming to know that the pollutants discovered were more than 300. The people in charge in those "bottom 10" should be working now to develop a water treatment that should address this problem. This is to assure the consumers of the safety of the water they are using in their daily lives which might affect their health one way or another.

[Patrick Vowell]

EWG has admitted that their database, particularly in regard to California, is flawed. See the story at: http://www.omaha.com/article/20100102/NEWS01/701029887

[Laer Pearce]

When the reporter heard that the Environmental Working Group was basing its "findings" on untreated water, she should have scrapped this story, because it's clearly a case of sensationalism by agenda-driven environmental advocates. Our water agencies are committed to water quality, spending millions of dollars annually on testing and treatment. Even if they weren't so committed, they're required by state and federal law to test to ensure that they are delivering clean, safe water.

Rather than sensationalize at home, the Environmental Working Group should focus on third world countries, whose citizens ARE at risk constantly from unsafe water. They need help and encouragement; we're doing fine.

[Mark Hayes]

The fact is that water treatment has not essentially changed in the last 100 years. There have of course been technological advances but at the end of the day it boils down to water going through a filter and the filter catching whatever is in the water. This design goes back to ancient Greece some 3,000 years ago. Modern filtration started about 100 years ago using mechanics to replace gravity as the filtering mechanism. Today, Florinated hydrocarbons, medicinal waste (both coming and going) and a host of industrial chemicals that didn't exist 50 years ago are now in our water supply. The worst is cities that draw waters from the ground and flush them down a river system. Aquifers around the world are collapsing due to overdrawing their waters. When an aquifer collapses it becomes an aquaclude, which prevents water flow due to lack of pore space.

Thus the solution is for cities and water districts to employ 21st century technology to treat water and waste water. Let's face it, City A discharging effluent only partially treated from a waste water treatment plant so City B spends more to drink water down stream is pretty stupid. Companies like Sionix are on the cutting edge of technology. Go to www.mngeos.com click on SIONIX to get an overview.

Thanks for reading and Merry Christmas