Analies Dyjak @ Tuesday, September 25, 2018 at 12:43 pm -0400
Analies Dyjak | Policy Nerd
For Hydroviv’s assessment of the city of Boynton Beach, Florida's drinking water, we collected water quality test data from the annual Boynton Beach Consumer Confidence Report and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. We cross referenced Boynton Beach 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 Boynton Beach drinking water.
Disinfection Byproducts In Boynton Beach Drinking Water
Let’s start with Disinfection Byproducts or DBPs. DBPs are formed when chlorine-based disinfectants that are routinely added to the water supply to kill bacteria, react with organic matter. Boynton Beach water quality has some pretty high levels of disinfection byproducts. According to the most recent report, concentrations of haloacetic acids averaged 26 parts per billion but reached levels as high as 33.7 parts per billion and concentrations of trihalomethanes averaged 74.8 parts per billion but reached levels as high as 149 parts per billion. For a bit of perspective, EPA’s maximum contaminant level for haloacetic acids is 60 parts per billion and 80 parts per billion for trihalomethanes. Health and regulatory agencies have very little knowledge about the adverse health effects of DBPs, and their toxicity. EPA has stated that they have been linked to an increased risk of bladder cancer, as well as kidney, liver, and central nervous system problems.
Chloramine In Boynton Beach Drinking Water
While most cities use chlorine, Boynton Beach uses chlorine and chloramine in the disinfection process. Chloramine is primarily responsible for what many customers report as the “bad taste” or “pool smell” of tap water. Concentrations of chloramine averaged 3.01 parts per billion but reached concentrations as high as 4.8 parts per billion. Again for a bit of perspective, the maximum contaminant level for chloramine is 4 parts per billion.
Analies Dyjak @ Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 12:39 pm -0500
Analies Dyjak | Policy Nerd
Our Water Nerds have been closely following the environmental and public health disaster in North Carolina for a while now. This article provides an overview of the recent consent order, and some background information on what's going on in North Carolina.
The Chemours Plant in Fayetteville, North Carolina has been discharging various per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (also known as PFAS) for decades. PFAS are a category of emerging contaminants that are found in some of the most popular consumer products such as Scotchgard, Gore-Tex, Teflon, and other stain/water resistant products. PFAS is also an important ingredient in firefighting foam, which has been a major source of water contamination throughout the country. In recent years, a replacement chemical for PFOA called GenX has dominated the conversation, particularly in North Carolina. In November 2018, EPA admitted that GenX is “suggestive” of cancer, which is significant for residents who have been unknowingly exposed.
$13 Million Awarded to NCDEQ
Chemours is awarding $13 million to the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality in the form of civil penalties and investigative costs. In comparison to other PFAS-related settlements, this is by far one of the smallest. In early 2018, 3M paid the state of Minnesota $850 Million in environmental degradation. In 2017, DuPont was involved in a $670.7 million settlement in the Mid-Ohio Valley region for PFAS water contamination.
Overview Of The Consent Order
The Consent Order clearly lays out a timeline of air emission goals and wastewater discharge stipulations. Chemours’ National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit was revoked in early 2017 and the new Consent Order prohibits any sort of wastewater discharge until a NPDES permit is reallocated. Chemours must also create laboratory methods and test standards for all PFAS compounds released by the Fayetteville plant. Basic remediation plans must be agreed upon by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, North Carolina River Keepers, and Chemours. Chemours will also pay for water filtration for water filtration for residents on private wells. Concentrations of GenX must be above 140 parts per trillion or any updated health advisory, in order to be eligible for a filter. GenX is not the only PFAS compound detected in the Cape Fear area, and the consent order addresses that. the Residents can also be eligible for filtration if other PFAS compounds are detected in well water over 10 parts per trillion individually, and 70 parts per trillion combined. NCDEQ is currently seeking public comment regarding the recent settlement.
How Are Cape Fear Residents Responding?
Cape Fear Public Utility Authority (CFPUA) created a comprehensive breakdown of the Chemours consent order. The utility provider acknowledged that the settlement did not go far enough to cover the scope of GenX and PFAS water contamination in the Cape Fear area. In a press release, CFPUA talked about how the consent order did not acknowledge the PFAS sediment pollution at the bottom of the Cape Fear River. Any sort of dredge or fill could disturb the sediment and create GenX concentrations to sky rocket in drinking water. Local non-profit groups are also not in agreement with the Chemours settlement because they believe it does not go far enough to mitigate the scope of PFAS water contamination. The current consent order places most of the mitigative costs water utility providers which would of course be paid for by taxpayers.
Our Take:
In early November of 2018, EPA released a draft toxicity report for GenX, proposing a threshold of 80 parts per trillion for drinking water. The concentration deemed “safe” by North Carolina and Chemours is almost two times higher than what the EPA is proposing as safe. Health and regulatory agencies know very little about the adverse health effects of GenX and other PFAS compounds. It’s up to consumers to decide the best course of action to protect themselves and their families.
Analies Dyjak @ Friday, July 27, 2018 at 2:51 pm -0400
Analies Dyjak, M.A. | Policy Nerd Updated August 2, 2019 to include current data
For Hydroviv’s assessment of Portland, Oregon drinking water quality, our Water Nerds collected test data from the Portland Water Bureau, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and other available data. We cross referenced these 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 Portland’s drinking water.
Where Does Portland, Oregon Source Its Drinking Water?
Portland sources its drinking water from the Bull Run River which is located in Mt. Hood National Forest. Portland also draws drinking water from the Columbia South Shore Well Field, which is made up of 26 groundwater wells. The wells draw water from three different aquifers located on the perimeter of the Columbia River.
Lead In Portland’s Drinking Water
Lead contamination is by far of biggest concern in Portland, Oregon drinking water. Not only are the city wide lead levels among the highest in the country, lead contamination has been getting worse in recent years. According to the most recent data, the 90th percentile for lead in Portland drinking water is 11.9 parts per billion. This is just under the outdated Federal Action Level of 15 parts per billion. In recent years, the 90th percentile in Portland has exceeded the Federal Action Level. Additionally, to put things in perspective, EPA, CDC, and American Academy of Pediatrics all recognize that there is no safe level of lead for children.
The goal of annual Consumer Confidence Reports is to be as transparent as possible so that residents can be informed about problems with their drinking water. Unfortunately, Portland’s report was written in a way that leaves consumers confused when it comes to lead. When reading through the report, lead levels for the treated source water are displayed prominently. Of course, these lead levels are very low, because lead contaminates water as it flows through lead containing pipes found in the distribution system and the home’s plumbing. The relevant data for samples collected at the tap are buried in a small table on the next to last page, separate from the other contaminants.
Disinfection Byproducts In Portland’s Drinking Water
Portland’s municipal water also had high concentrations of Disinfection Byproducts or DBPs. Concentrations were detected as high as 44.5 parts per billion, and averaged 37.7 parts per billion for Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs). Haloacetic Acids-5 (HAA5) concentrations were as high as 51.2 parts per billion and averaged 37.7 parts per billion. For a bit of perspective, EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level for TTHMs is 80 parts per billion and 60 parts per billion for HAA5. While Portland's water quality chemical concentrations are technically 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. DBPs are formed when chlorine-based disinfectants are routinely added to the water supply to kill bacteria. EPA has stated that they have been linked to an increased risk of bladder cancer, as well as kidney, liver, and central nervous system problems. Some disinfection byproducts have almost no toxicity, but others have been associated with cancer, reproductive problems, and developmental issues in laboratory animals.
Chloramine In Portland’s Drinking Water
While most municipalities use chlorine as the primary drinking water disinfectant, Portland’s drinking water is disinfected with chloramine. Chloramine is primarily responsible for what many customers report as the “bad taste” or “pool smell” of tap water. Unlike chlorine, chloramine does not dissipate if a container of water is left in the refrigerator overnight. Most one-size-fits-all water filters use filtration media that doesn’t do a great job removing chloramine, but the filters that we design and build at Hydroviv for Portland's water problems use a special filtration media that is purposefully designed to remove chloramine.
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 Portland’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.
Water Nerds @ Saturday, February 10, 2018 at 10:08 am -0500
Analies Dyjak | Hydroviv Policy Analyst
While there’s a lot of debate on what should and shouldn’t be regulated in terms of chemical discharge by companies, we thought that it would be interesting to show how regulations are used in the real-world. In this article, we talk about the permits that allow entities to discharge chemicals into sewers and waterways.
What Is An NPDES Permit?
The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permits disclose which chemicals companies are allowed to discharge into waterways, and at what concentrations. The overall goal of a NPDES permit is to provide transparency between the polluter, the federal government and the public.
Who Needs To Get An NPDES Permit?
Any company, organization of private entity that has plans to discharge pollution from a point source into a United States waterway.
How Are NPDES Permits Granted & Distributed?
Technology-based and water quality based limitations are two criteria that are considered when issuing a permit. Technology-based limitations take into consideration the technology and economic ability of the polluters to control the discharge of pollutants from their facilities. Water quality-based limitations are meant to protect the body of water that the effluent is being discharged into. Once a permitting authority or company completes a Notice of Intent (NOI) for a NPDES permit, it becomes available to the public via the Federal Register. Often local newspapers will publish a notice of the application and provide information regarding public comments.
Where Can I Find an Existing NPDES Permit?
Existing NPDES permits can be found in the General Permit Web Inventory section of the EPA’s website. Required information to search for a NPDES permit includes either the name of a state, permit number, or permitting authority.
What Should A NPDES Permit Include?
Information on each known contaminant must be included in a NPDES permit, whether it is regulated by the EPA or not.
Clear, concise, and consistent units. When a regulatory agency signs off on a NPDES permit without units, they’re essentially allowing a company to discharge a contaminant at any concentration.
Pertinent information that might affect concentration levels.
For example seasonal variance or increased turbidity.
A NPDES permit should also have information on monitoring such as location and frequency of sampling.
Why You Should Care About NPDES Permitting
Public participation has the ability to prolong the issuing process and can cause a company to alter their plans for dealing with chemical discharge. If you have questions regarding a NPDES permit in your area, don’t hesitate to address your concerns during the required public comment period. Be vigilant in assessing every component of the water discharge permit!
Want To Learn More About NPDES Permits And Water Policy?
Feel free to reach out to our Water Nerds through live chat or email (hello@hydroviv.com). We're happy to help you out!
Water Nerds @ Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 3:55 pm -0400
Aakriti Pandey | Contributor
Editor's Note: This article is part of a new initiative to include stories on our blog that link scientific policy to everyday life. Recently, the new administration proposed changes to the EPA budget that would gut the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), which could impact the water quality of major cities (e.g. Chicago, Milwaukee)
An upward slope
1972 was the year that marked the turning point for Great Lakes, Michigan. It was the year when Congress passed the federal Clean Water Act, and as a result, the water quality did improve in most expanses of the North American rivers and lakes, the contaminants' concentration declined, and many fisheries across the nation recuperated too. The water quality of the Great Lakes today are far improved than they did back in 1972.
A downward slide
However, there's a host of new problems today that are affecting both, the nature and the people, again. From the dissemination of the foreign mussels and other invasive aquatic species, sewer and pollution overflows caused by some severe storms, introduction of other contaminants in the lakes including the pharmaceuticals and fire retardants, to the overall climate change... the ecology of the Great Lakes have been turned upside down again. The Lake Michigan car ferry SS Badger has dumped about 500 tons of polluted coal ash into the lake every year. There are cities with archaic sewer systems, and they expel tens of billions of gallons of sewage into the lakes annually.
As water pollution in the Great Lakes increases, not only are the lives of aquatic species in danger, but this is also deeply affecting human health. People who call places like Chicago, Milwaukee, Green Bay, and many other cities alongside the Lake Michigan their home, draw their drinking water from the Great Lakes. And their lives are in danger.
Another up...
An initiative was given birth in 2010 with a vision to protect and restore this largest system of fresh surface water in the world. The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) intended to accelerate efforts to "strategically target the biggest threats to the Great Lakes ecosystem". With plans to clean up the areas of concern, control the invasive species, reduce nutrient runoff, and restore habitat, the GLRI gave sight of the dim light at the end of the tunnel.
And the new downward spiral?
Those who've been grateful for the GLRI are now holding their breaths again as this plan is close to being very short-lived because the new administration announced plans for a $50 million cut from the GLRI funding as part of the new EPA budget.
For one, it's important for initiatives like this to study the impacts of these types of inevitable accidents. More importantly, it's also of momentous value to collectively remain vigilant as a community about what's happening in our environment and surroundings.
Very recent events highlight the need for initiatives like GLRI to remain funde. For example, U.S. Steel Corporation also recently accidentally released hexavalent chromium into Lake Michigan, forcing the interception of drinking water intake in the local communities and a closing of many beaches.
Hydroviv's water nerds have a "Help no matter what" technical support policy, and we always answer your drinking-water related questions, regardless of your intent to purchase our products.