Analies Dyjak @ Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 2:29 pm -0400
Analies Dyjak | Policy Nerd
For Hydroviv’s assessment of Chattanooga, Tennessee’s drinking water, we collected water quality test data from the city’s Consumer Confidence Report and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. We cross referenced Chattanooga’s water quality data with toxicity studies in scientific and medical literature. The water filters that we sell at Hydroviv are optimized to filter out contaminants that are found in Chattanooga’s drinking water.
Where Does Chattanooga Source Its Drinking Water?
Chattanooga sources its drinking water primarily from the Tennessee River. Chattanooga's tap water is treated at the Tennessee American Water Citico Water Treatment Plant before being distributed to over 177,000 people in Chattanooga.
Disinfection Byproducts In Chattanooga’s Drinking Water
In recent years, Chattanooga's water quality has had a major problem with disinfection byproducts or DBPs. DBPs form when chlorine-based disinfectants that are routinely added to treat incoming water, react with organic matter. DBPs are split into two categories; Haloacetic Acids-5 (HAA5) and Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs). Concentrations of TTHMs averaged 70 parts per billion, but were detected as high as 89.1 parts per billion in Chattanooga water. HAA5 concentrations averaged 41.8 parts per billion and reached levels as high as 51.4 parts per billion. For a bit of perspective, EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level for HAA5 is 60 parts per billion and 80 parts per billion for TTHMs. While technically still in compliance, these levels are definitely high. Disinfection Byproducts are a category of emerging contaminants which means they have been detected in drinking water but the risk to human health is unknown. Regulatory agencies have very little knowledge about the adverse health effects of DBPs, and their toxicity.
Lead In Chattanooga’s Drinking Water
Next is lead. Lead enters Chattanooga's tap water through old lead service pipes and lead-containing plumbing. 10% of sites that were tested for lead had concentrations over 2 parts per billion. Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Disease Control, and American Academy of Pediatrics all recognize that there is no safe level of lead for children. While this years lead concentrations in Chattanooga are relatively low compared to other municipalities in the US, lead is a neurotoxin that can potentially be harmful at any concentration.
It’s important to note that only a handful of contaminants are required to be included in annual Consumer Confidence Reports, and that there are hundreds of potentially harmful unregulated contaminants that aren’t accounted for. If you’re interested in learning more about water filters that have been optimized for Chattanooga’s tap water quality, feel free to visit www.hydroviv.com to talk to a Water Nerd on our live chat feature or send us an email at hello@hydroviv.com.
Analies Dyjak @ Monday, October 1, 2018 at 1:10 pm -0400
Analies Dyjak | Policy Nerd
Lead contamination in drinking water is a huge problem for municipalities with an older infrastructure. Lead contamination occurs when water comes in contact with lead pipes. This article discusses a common additive used to combat lead pipe corrosion.
What is Orthophosphate?
Orthophosphate is a common corrosion inhibitor used by water suppliers to prevent lead pipes from leaching. When orthophosphate water treatment is added to a water source, it reacts with lead to create a mineral-like crust inside of the lead pipe. This crust acts as a coating which prevents further lead corrosion. The use of orthophosphate treatment in drinking water became popularized in 2001, during the lead crisis in Washington, D.C. Lead contamination in many cities including D.C. and Flint, occurs when a city’s water becomes more corrosive, which can allow for lead from pipes to leach into the drinking water supply. When the lead problem initially occurred, cities such as Flint, Michigan, Durham and Greenville, North Carolina, and Jackson, Mississippi didn’t learn from D.C’s mistakes and all had lead outbreaks.
Does Orthophosphate Fix Lead Contamination?
It certainly can. Once the protective layer is formed, cities can find that lead concentrations in the water drop by 90%. However, Orthophosphate is somewhat of a bandaid to temporarily fix the presence of lead in drinking water. For example, if the protective layer is corroded away or otherwise disturbed (e.g. in the case of a partial service line replacement or the water’s corrosivity changes), lead can leach back into the water. Finally, not all municipalities are adding orthophosphate to drinking water because of its cost. If you have any questions regarding lead prevention in drinking water, send us an email at hello@hydroviv.com.
Analies Dyjak @ Friday, January 4, 2019 at 1:59 pm -0500
Analies Dyjak, M.A | Head of Policy and Perspectives
Whenever severe water contamination impacts a community, people (and media outlets) tend to jump to bottled water as the only water contamination solution. The bottled water industry has managed to convince vulnerable consumers that their product is inherently safer than what’s coming out of their taps. Oftentimes, this isn’t the case. So why is bottled water bad? The reality is that bottled water is associated with a host of ethical, environmental and regulatory problems. Drinking bottled water is not a long-term solution to water contamination, and we should critically examine its role as water quality crises continue to pop up across the country. Here are our main problems with the bottled water industry to give you a better idea of why bottled water is bad.
1) Bottled Water Companies Use The Same Source As Tap Water
According to the FDA, bottled water companies are permitted to package and sell water from municipal taps, artesian wells, mineral water, natural springs, and drilled wells. Surprisingly enough, they aren’t required to disclose the source water itself. If you’re looking for transparency, municipal systems are required to publish an annual Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) that discloses characteristics about the source water, treatment techniques, and other distribution information. The bottled water industry also frequently packages and distributes groundwater from dug wells. Groundwater can often be more susceptible to pollution than surface water because it’s not regulated by the federal government. Groundwater acts as a catchment for surface water runoff and agricultural pollution, not to mention its increased risk of arsenic contamination.
2) Bottled Water and Tap Water Have Almost Identical Standards
People are often surprised to learn that there’s virtually no difference between the regulations for bottled water and tap water. The Environmental Protection Agency regulates tap water and the Food and Drug Administration regulates bottled water. The allowable concentrations of contaminants are identical for both, with the exception of lead. The standard for lead in bottled water is 5 parts per billion, as opposed to 15 parts per billion in tap water. This is because during bottling production, water should never come in contact with older lead service pipes the same way municipal water does. Arsenic can be present in groundwater as a result of natural weathering of bedrock. Exposure to arsenic in drinking water can result in cancers in various organs, including skin, bladder, lung, kidney, liver, and prostate. Non-cancerous health effects include neurological damage, such as peripheral neuropathy.
3) Impacts On The Environment
It’s well-documented that single-use plastic water bottles wreak havoc on the environment. Plastics are made from petroleum, which is a fossil fuel and a non-renewable resource. Companies often tout their commitment to reducing plastic consumption by weight, but this has no bearing on the volume at which it’s produced. You may be familiar with “Trash Island,” in the Northern Pacific Ocean. This phenomenon is the result of decades of poor waste management and excessive production of various types of plastic. According to a 2016 study by the Ellen Macarthur Foundation, the ocean will contain more plastic by weight than fish by the year 2050. Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) is the main ingredient in plastic water bottles. PET takes over 400 years to decompose in the environment and its constituents can often take longer to degrade. Chemicals like Bisphenol A (BPA) have since been phased out of plastic production, but are still very much present in the environment and will continue to be released as older plastics degrade.
4) False Advertising
Marketing schemes deceive consumers into believing that companies use pristine source water. The packaging uses carefully curated images of mountain-top creeks and streams to suggest pure, untainted products. The reality is bottled water hardly ever comes from the sources depicted on the label.
5) Ethical Dilemma
Nestle, a company with a long track record of unscrupulous business practices, owns deep aquifers throughout California, a state which has been experiencing drought-like conditions for several decades. The expensive equipment purchased by Nestle allows the company to extract water in a way that tribes and municipalities cannot afford to do. Similar companies have been known to use their purchasing power to acquire land, pushing tribes and municipalities out of the conversation. Problems arise when drought-stricken or contaminated communities are unable to afford the same resources as bottled water companies.
Our Take:
While bottled water offers some measure of immediate relief to a severe drinking water crisis, it is in no way a long-term water contamination solution. Companies often sell the same water that’s feeding municipal systems. Not to mention, EPA and FDA have almost identical regulations for both tap and bottled water. There’s also an inherent cost associated with bottled water, which varies depending on the brand. Finally, a huge part of why bottled water is bad is that scientific data confirms the importance of reducing plastic pollution on a global scale. Municipal providers offer greater transparency and are required to disclose information about the source water.
When people think of plastic waste they likely think of items such as bottles, bags, and straws, but there are smaller objects that inconspicuously threaten habitats and wildlife. Microplastic waste is a monumental problem world-wide, but has received little attention until recently. Microplastic waste endangers both organisms living on land and those in aquatic habitats, and may harm humans. Additionally, microplastics in water interfere with industries like fishing, shipping, and tourism, which suffer at least $13 billion in damages every year from plastic pollution. Microplastics are used in large quantities in many products and are harder to clean up than other plastic materials. This article answers several questions pertaining to microplastics, some of which may surprise consumers.
What Are Microplastics?
The term “microplastics” is used to describe particles that are made of nondegradable plastic, smaller than five millimeters long, and cannot dissolve in water. Several sources are responsible for creating microplastics: mechanical forces, sunlight, and weather wear down and fracture large plastic containers; plastic pellets used for manufacturing; and the small, manufactured plastic beads used in health and beauty products. Known as “microbeads”, these tiny pollutants may be as small as one micrometer (1 μm), making them completely invisible to the naked eye. An estimated eight trillion microbeads enter aquatic environments every day, which is equivalent to lining up microbeads side by side and covering more than 300 tennis courts daily! A 2015 study estimated between 15 trillion and 51 trillion microplastic particles had accumulated in world oceans. Microplastics are entering aquatic environments in copious amounts, and coupled with the small size of these particles, environmentalists are struggling to develop methods to successfully clean up these particles.
Where Do Microplastics Come From?
Microbeads, the manufactured plastic beads that are added as exfoliates, have been replacing natural ingredients in personal care products for the last fifty years. Face wash, skin scrub, hand soap, makeup, shampoo and conditioner, hair dye, sunscreen, baby care products, cleaner, nail polish, deodorant, and toothpaste are just a few of the consumer goods that contain microplastics (including microbeads). These particles can account for up to 90 percent of the ingredients in certain cosmetic products. An even less talked about source of microplastics is nylon and polyester clothing. Laundering nylon and polyester clothing causes tiny bits of plastic to wash down the drain and eventually empty into lakes, streams, and oceans. One study found that as many as 700,000 tiny synthetic fibers (i.e., pieces of nylon or polyester) washed down the drain after one cycle in the washing machine, while a study conducted using four different types of synthetic fleece jackets revealed that every time a synthetic fleece jacket was washed, 1.7 grams of microfibers were washed down the drain.
Why Do We Care About Microplastics?
Microplastics in water have the potential to pose an environmental hazard from the moment they enter bodies of water. Fish and other aquatic wildlife ingest microplastics, which may irritate or damage their digestive system. If microplastics are not excreted and instead accumulate in the gut, the animal may mistakenly believe it is full of nutritious food instead of harmful plastic, resulting in malnutrition or starvation. Microplastics may also affect the feeding behavior, predator avoidance capabilities, and cell function in some vertebrates and invertebrates as well as alter sediment composition. Microplastics also serve as a vessel, carrying pollutants like pesticides and manufactured chemicals such as BPA, DDT, and PCB’s, which may be ingested or filtered by animals. Crustaceans and other filter feeders may also experience a decrease in reproductive success due to the consumption of microplastics. Filter-feeding organisms play an important role in creating a healthy food web, and microplastics may adversely affect the biology and physiology of these animals and any animal who consumes them.
It’s not just wildlife that is threatened by plastics in our water bodies. Evidence suggests that humans who eat seafood are also consuming the plastic particles that fish and shellfish already ingested. In 2014, researchers purchased fish and shellfish from Indonesian and American markets that were selling seafood for human consumption to assess the number of plastic pieces in the animals’ guts. In Indonesia and the United States, approximately one out of every four fish contained small plastic or fibrous debris while one out of every three shellfish sampled in the United States contained some sort of small debris in their guts. While it seems apparent that aquatic wildlife are not the only organisms to consume plastic particles, the effects of microplastic consumption on human health are not yet clear.
What Is Unknown About Microplastics?
A lot. Research on plastic pollution, which includes the study of microplastics, is still a relatively new field, so a great deal is still unknown with regards to microplastics and their effects on aquatic organisms, habitats, and human health. Scientists are still identifying how best to quantify the number of microplastics (in all size ranges) that enter aquatic environments, which organisms consume and accumulate particles, and whether the affected animals harm the predators (including humans) that eat them. In other words, the extent of damage that microplastics are causing to habitats and species at all levels of the food chain need to be studied in much more detail.
What Is Being Done To Learn More?
Researchers are working to answer many unknowns: the extent of microplastics in the ocean; how microplastics uptake in the food web; if pollutants transfer to animals from microplastic particles; and the potential impacts on the conservation and health of aquatic plants and animals. A collaborative effort between researchers at the University of Washington Tacoma and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Marine Debris Program has led to the establishment of a reliable method to use weight to quantify the amount of microplastics in sand, sediment, or a water sample. Similarly, many nonprofit organizations were formed to investigate microplastic pollution and its effects on wildlife and human health.
What is Being Done To Fix The Problem?
In recent years, preventing microplastics from entering waterways has received international attention. Important work is ongoing to develop ways to minimize the amount of microplastics going down drains and clean up plastic already polluting bodies of water. Additionally, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and universities are working together to evidence and encourage lawmakers to pass legislation requiring companies to use fewer microplastic ingredients in their products. Several states in the U.S. and countries around the world have banned the manufacture and sale of one-time use plastic products, which will reduce the number of plastic items in a landfill that will eventually become microplastic pieces. Many nonprofit organizations work tirelessly to combat the world’s plastics problem. The Ocean Cleanup Project recently developed a new method to remove 70,000 metric tons of plastic from the sea within ten years. Other efforts include collaborations between nonprofits and clothing manufacturers to create clothing and footwear made entirely out of plastic debris. On a global scale, the United Nations held an environmental assembly for the first time in 2014 involving more than 150 governments who are concerned about the effects of microplastic pollution in water bodies around the globe. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was tasked with studying aspects of microplastic debris in marine environments worldwide and developing methods for reducing the number of sources of microplastics. UNEP also works to mitigate the global impacts that microplastics have on habitats, marine flora and fauna, and humans. Closer to home, former President Barack Obama signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act, which banned the use of microbeads in all personal care products manufactured after 2015. This Act was a respectable first step in eliminating the use of microplastics while also increasing public awareness and prompting some corporate action. However, it contains language that leaves room for the use of microbeads in items that are not considered “personal care” or “rinse-off products” like deodorants, nail polish, or cleansers. It also contains loose definitions of the terms “plastic” and “biodegradable”, which allows companies to produce plastic products that biodegrade only slightly (not fully) over a short period of time.
In the short term, focusing on improving wastewater management facilities and their ability to prevent smaller plastic debris from reaching the water has been considered a decent first step. Perhaps more important for long-term success would be a shift in the way we think about all plastic, regardless of size. Treating plastic as a valuable, limited resource like water instead of an inexhaustible resource that can be discarded after one use would ultimately lead to a reduction in the amount of microplastics in water bodies. If companies redesigned products to be more ecofriendly, contain less synthetic material, and use safer chemicals and consumers used these products more responsibly, we will reduce the potential for health threats posed by microplastics.
Analies Dyjak @ Monday, July 30, 2018 at 10:07 am -0400
**Updated July 11, 2022 to include most recent water quality data
Analies Dyjak, M.A. | Hydroviv Research Analyst
Hydroviv's Water Nerds have updated our assessment of Las Vegas drinking water to include data from the latest Consumer Confidence Report. We looked at data from the Las Vegas Valley Water District, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Environmental Working Group, and the US Geological Survey. Our Water Nerds then cross referenced these data with toxicity studies in the scientific and medical literature, as well as upcoming regulatory changes. The custom water filters that we build for our customers in Las Vegas are optimized with this research in mind.
Source Of Las Vegas's Drinking Water
90% of Las Vegas drinking water comes from Lake Mead. Lake Mead is supplied by snowmelt from the Rocky Mountains, which flows into the Colorado River. The remaining 10% comes from a groundwater aquifer under the Las Vegas Valley. This aquifer is naturally replenished by precipitation in the Spring Mountains and the Sheep Range.
What are the concerns in Las Vegas Drinking Water?
Contaminants of concern in Las Vegas’ drinking water include Lead, PFAS, Arsenic, Disinfection Byproducts, Uranium, and Chromium 6.
Lead In Las Vegas Drinking Water
Lead enters tap water through older lead service pipes and lead-containing plumbing. When corrosion control measures put in place by the municipality fail (like what happened in Flint, Michigan), lead leaches into the drinking water, and can reach dangerous levels. Homes built before 1986 are most susceptible to lead contamination. According to the 2022 report, 10% of drinking water samples analyzed for lead in Las Vegas are over 3.9 parts per billion, with samples measuring as high as 5.6 parts per billion. Though Las Vegas water quality is currently in compliance with federal regulations,the EPA, CDC, and American Academy of Pediatrics have all made clear that there is no such thing as a safe level of lead, and of course, federal regulations cannot take into account levels measured at an individual tap. Hydroviv Drinking Water filters are NSF/ANSI Standard 53 certified to remove lead from drinking water.
PFAS in Las Vegas Drinking Water
Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) are a category of emerging contaminants commonly used in firefighting foam, Teflon, non-stick surfaces, stain-resistant surfaces, and food packaging. TheAgency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has determined thatPFAS exposure is associated with various adverse health effects, including an increased risk of cancer, lowered fertility rates, and developmental issues in infants and young children.
Testing that was done by the Environmental Working Group detected PFAS in groundwater at military bases in and near Las Vegas, including Nellis Air Force Base in Las Vegas, where groundwater on base had PFOA + PFOS levels as high as 47,400 parts per trillion (ppt), and Creech Air Force base in Clark County, NV, which had PFAS levels as high as 21,066 ppt. On April 10, 2024, the US EPA has announced drinking water standards to limit exposure to 6 types of PFAS chemicals, including 4 ppt for PFOA and PFOS.Not all water filtersare designed to remove PFAS from tap water. If you'd like to find water filters that remove PFAS from tap water, check out thisDuke/NC State PFAS study.Hydroviv filters are NSF/ANSI Standard 53 certified for PFOA/PFOS removal.
Arsenic in Las Vegas Drinking Water
Arsenic is a hazardous heavy metal that can cause cancer and other health problems. Arsenic originates in source water naturally. In the Las Vegas Valley Water District, varying amounts of arsenic were detected in the different distribution areas, ranging from 0.7 ppb to 4.0 ppb. While Las Vegas’ Arsenic levels were not in violation of EPA water quality standards, consumers should know that the U.S. EPA's standard balances toxicity against the costs of removing arsenic from drinking water. We strongly suggest that tap water with levels higher than 1 part per billion be treated to remove arsenic, especially in homes with children.
Disinfection Byproducts (DBPs) In Las Vegas Drinking Water
DBPs are a category of emerging contaminants that form when chlorine-based disinfectants (added to the water supply to protect consumers) react with naturally-occurring organic matter. EPA regulates two categories of DBPs: Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs) and Haloacetic Acids (HAA5). The EPA has stated that DBPs have been associated with increased risk of bladder cancer, as well as kidney, liver, and central nervous system problems. Haloacetic Acid levels in Las Vegas water ranged between 35 - 45 parts per billion. Total Trihalomethane levels ranged between 68 to 82 parts per billion, which exceeds the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level of 80 parts per billion.
Uranium in Las Vegas Drinking Water
Uranium is a naturally occurring radioactive substance normally found in rocks, soil, air and water. Uranium enters water by leaching from soil and rocks, or in releases from processing plants. Uranium has demonstrated toxic effects on human kidneys leading to their inflammation and changes in urine composition. Uranium can decay into other radioactive substances, such as radium, which can cause cancer with extensive exposure over a long period of time. Uranium levels in Las Vegas water ranged from 2 to 4 parts per billion.
High Chromium 6 Levels In Las Vegas Drinking Water
Chromium 6 is a toxic metal that is not regulated by the EPA. Las Vegas tap water had Chromium 6 levels ranging from 54 parts per trillion to 850 parts per trillion. California has determined that 20 parts per trillion is the contaminant level below which there is minimal health risk. The Chromium 6 levels in the Las Vegas water system range from nearly 3 to over 40 times the level generally accepted as safe.
How Can Hydroviv Help Me?
Hydroviv is a water filtration company that uses water quality data to optimize water filters for each customer's water. The contaminants that we list above are what we consider to be major “points of emphasis” that we use to build water filters that are built specifically for Las Vegas' water, but all of our filters also include broad protection against a wide range of contaminants.
If you’re interested in learning more about water filters that have been optimized for Las Vegas tap water, or just have questions about water quality in general, feel free to visit www.hydroviv.com, reach out by email (hello@hydroviv.com) or through our live chat. We post water-related news on Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
Hydroviv's drinking water filters carry NSF certifications to Standard 42 (aesthetic effects--Chlorine Removal) and Standard 53 (health effects--Lead, VOCs, and PFOA/PFOS removal), and are independently tested to remove hundreds of contaminants.
