NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label water pollution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water pollution. Show all posts

23 August 2022

Is drinking rainwater safe? & 'Forever chemicals' stay in the air and water permanently. But scientists have found a new way to destroy them. 21&18AUG22


 IN these times of widespread severe drought as well as overwhelming rains it is unfortunate that captured rainwater is not safe to drink no matter where you are. The first article, from LiveScience coveres the dangers of drinking rain water. The second article, from NBC NEWS offers some hope to address the major problem of rainwater, and actually all water which seems  to be polluted with PFAS......

Is drinking rainwater safe?

New evidence suggests it may be riskier than previously thought.

If you stick out your tongue on a rainy day, you might think the drops you've tasted are the same as the water that comes out of your tap. But rainwater actually contains many microscopic ingredients that get filtered out before it is pumped into your home. 

So is it safe to collect and drink rainwater?

There are a number of contaminants that can end up in the rainwater, such as bacteriaviruses, parasites, dust, smoke particles and other chemicals, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(opens in new tab) (CDC). If you collect rainwater from a roof, it could also contain traces left by animals, such as bird poop, and if the roof or drainpipes are old, materials such as asbestos, lead and copper could also end up in your tank. If rainwater is stored in an open container, it also may be full of insects and decaying organic matter, such as dead leaves. For these reasons, the CDC advises against collecting and drinking rainwater but recommends using it for other purposes, such as watering plants. 

However, the levels of these contaminants can vary significantly depending on where you live, and the risk of illness depends largely on how much rainwater you drink. If you have a clean collection system and properly sterilize the rainwater, either with chemicals or by boiling and distillation, then most of the impurities can be removed. This has led to a lot of confusion about whether rainwater is unsafe to drink.

But now, in the modern age of human-made chemicals, there's a new risk associated with drinking rainwater. In a study published in August 2022 in the journal Environmental Science & Technology(opens in new tab), researchers found that rainwater all over the globe has concentrations of toxic PFAS (per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances) that exceed health guidelines. These findings mean that rainwater is definitely unsafe to drink, especially if it is untreated. 

What are PFAS? 

PFAS is a collective term for more than 1,400 human-made chemicals and substances that have historically been used for a range of products, including textiles, firefighting foams, nonstick cookware, food packaging, artificial turf and guitar strings, lead study author Ian Cousins, an environmental chemist at Stockholm University in Sweden, told Live Science in an email. 

However, "the current understanding of biological impacts is based primarily on studies of four perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs)," which is a subgroup of PFAS, Cousins said. These PFAAs include perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) and perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA), which were the main focus of the study, he added. 

Past research has shown that these chemicals are extremely toxic and can cause a wide range of problems — including different types of cancer, infertility, pregnancy complications, developmental problems, immune system conditions, and various diseases of the bowels, liver and thyroid — as well as potentially decrease the effectiveness of vaccines in children, Cousins said. PFAS are also likely to cause additional damage to the environment, but this idea has not been studied in as much detail, he added. 

This evidence has led PFAAs and most other PFAS to be either banned or heavily restricted within the past 20 to 30 years, except in China and some other Asian countries, Cousins said. The health guidelines surrounding PFAS have also been readjusted to reflect the chemicals' toxicity. For example, in the U.S., the safe level of exposure to PFOA as determined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 37.5 million times less than it once was, according to a statement by the researchers(opens in new tab).

PFAS do not break down very easily, which means they remain in the environment long after they are produced and are just as toxic, Cousins said. This has led scientists to nickname PFAS "forever chemicals," he added.

Contaminated rainwater 

In the study, researchers gathered data from rainwater samples collected across the globe, revealing that PFAS are still abundant in rainwater everywhere on Earth in concentrations above the safety guidelines set by the EPA and other similar regulatory bodies in other countries. 

Experts had hoped that concentrations of PFAS might have started declining by now, but this is clearly not the case, Cousins said. Instead, researchers think PFAS represent a new planetary boundary, a conceptual limit beyond which something becomes unsafe to humans, that we have already exceeded, he added.

The most striking finding was that PFOA levels in rainwater are at least 10 times over the EPA's safe level at every location sampled on the planet, including the Tibetan Plateau and Antarctica.

The researchers are still unsure exactly how PFAS are being transported to the most remote parts of the globe, Cousins said. The team hypothesizes that PFAS on the surface of the ocean are being reinjected into the atmosphere by ocean spray and then transported to other regions, where they fall as rain; they plan to test this hypothesis in future research. It is also possible that PFAS are still leaking into the environment from landfills, Cousins added.

It is too early to predict the overall public health impacts PFAS-rich rainwater will cause around the globe, but they might already be underway. "We have been exposed at even higher levels for the past 20 to 30 years already," Cousins said. "We just now understand better the potential consequences of that exposure."

The impact of PFAS will likely be greater in developing countries where millions of people rely on rainwater as their only source of drinking water, Cousins said. But even in certain regions of developed nations, such as Western Australia, drinking rainwater is still surprisingly common, he added.

Even if rainwater is properly treated, there is still no guarantee that PFAS will have been removed. PFAS can also be found in low levels in drinking water from taps and bottles, although often at safe levels.

The levels of PFAS will eventually decrease as they get cycled into the deep ocean, but this is a gradual process that could take many decades, Cousins said.

Harry Baker
Harry Baker 

Harry is a U.K.-based staff writer at Live Science. He studied Marine Biology at the University of Exeter (Penryn campus) and after graduating started his own blog site "Marine Madness," which he continues to run with other ocean enthusiasts. He is also interested in evolution, climate change, robots, space exploration, environmental conservation and anything that's been fossilized. When not at work he can be found watching sci-fi films, playing old Pokemon games or running (probably slower than he'd like). 

Originally published on Live Science.


'Forever chemicals' stay in the air and water permanently. But scientists have found a new way to destroy them.

PFAS chemicals are associated with low birth weight, thyroid disease and an increased risk of certain cancers.


PFAS, a class of synthetic chemicals used in the manufacture of consumer products, can linger permanently in the air, water and soil, which is why they're often referred to as "forever chemicals."

The chemicals are associated with low birth weight, high cholesterol, thyroid disease and an increased risk of certain cancers. A study published earlier this month found that exposure to high levels of PFOS — a type of PFAS once used to make items such as clothing and food packaging resistant to stains, grease and water — was associated with an increased risk of liver cancer. Its sister chemical, PFOA, has been associated with an increased risk of kidney cancer.

So scientists have tried for years to find ways to break down PFAS, an acronym for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. On Thursday, researchers at Northwestern University published a study showing that PFAS can be destroyed using two relatively harmless chemicals: sodium hydroxide or lye, a chemical used to make soap, and dimethyl sulfoxide, a chemical approved as a medication for bladder pain syndrome.

Previously, the only operational way to break down PFAS was to expose the particles to extremely high temperatures — sometimes above 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit — in an incinerator. But that energy-intensive process can still release harmful chemicals into the environment.

The new method appears to be safer and more energy-efficient. The Northwestern scientists added PFAS molecules to a solution of lye and dimethyl sulfoxide and exposed them to temperatures of up to 248 degrees Fahrenheit. The chemicals degraded into fluoride ions and other harmless byproducts.

"One specific portion of these molecules falls off and sets off a cascade of reactions that ultimately breaks these PFAS compounds down to relatively benign products," William Dichtel, a professor of chemistry at Northwestern University who co-authored the study, said on a call with reporters.

PFAS are nearly impossible to destroy because of their strong carbon-fluorine bonds. Brittany Trang, another co-author, compared the process of breaking apart the molecules to smashing a Lego block to bits.

Currently, PFAS can be filtered out of water but then need to be destroyed somehow. If the chemicals are dumped in a landfill or tossed in an incinerator, they can still pollute the environment.

"The current way that people will try to dispose of firefighting foams that contain PFAS is to incinerate them, but there has been evidence that these incinerators are actually just blowing the PFAS around the community in which the incinerator is located," Trang said. "So there’s a need for a method to get rid of PFAS in a way that does not continue to pollute."

Challenges in treating drinking water

PFAS were invented in the 1930s and used in nonstick and waterproof coatings for consumer goods starting in the 1940s and 50s. Since then, the chemicals have been found in all sorts of household items, including carpets, cookware and personal care products.

PFOA and PFOS were largely phased out of U.S. chemical and product manufacturing in the mid-2000s, but have since been replaced by a new group of PFAS chemicals called GenX. But the older chemicals persist in the environment, including in drinking water.

The Environmental Protection Agency issued new limits for safe levels of PFAS in drinking water in June. According to the agency, PFOA levels can be harmful above 0.004 parts per trillion, while PFOS levels can be harmful above 0.02 parts per trillion. The agency also set a limit of 10 parts per trillion for GenX.

The EPA acknowledged in a press release at the time that "some negative health effects may occur with concentrations of PFOA or PFOS in water that are near zero and below EPA’s ability to detect."

The Northwestern researchers broke apart PFAS molecules at higher concentrations than the EPA warns about, though they think the process could remove lower concentrations from water too.

However, although the new method was able to degrade PFOA and GenX chemicals, Dichtel said, PFOS can’t be destroyed in the same way. So the researchers are looking into other methods for that.

The Environmental Working Group, a research and advocacy group focused on toxic chemicals, monitors pollutants in drinking water and estimated in June that 2,000 U.S. communities had levels of PFAS in their drinking water that were above the EPA's new limits.

It will likely take several years for scientists to develop a solution that can be rolled out in these communities, said Christopher Sales, an associate professor of environmental engineering at Drexel University who was not involved in the new study.

"A lot of methods used to destroy [PFAS] haven't really been proven to destroy it at those really low, low concentrations," he said.

If the new approach were to be applied to water treatment on a wide scale, the water would likely need to go from a treatment facility to an off-site location. There, the PFAS could be extracted, then exposed to the necessary mixture of lye and dimethyl sulfoxide.

"The big question is whether or not this process could be scaled up," Sales said.

He said other researchers are also investigating ways to destroy PFAS at lower temperatures — perhaps even at room temperature.

Overall, the problem may require multiple solutions, Sales said: "I don't think there's one single silver bullet to treat PFAS."




14 November 2014

URGENT ACTION NEEDED: The House is voting on Keystone XL TODAY! 14NOV14

THE house will be voting on the keystone xl pipeline sometime today. Environmentalist, ranchers, Native Americans, renewable energy advocates in Canada and the U.S. have been campaigning against this pipeline for the past several years. It is bad for the environment, a very real threat to the Ogallala Aquifer, it will not come close to creating as many good paying, permanent jobs as investing in renewable energy would, it is a threat to our nation's breadbasket in the Midwest and the mining and refining of this filthy tar sands oil will increase the carbon pollution of the U.S. and Canada. The only ones who will benefit are the tax dodging oil companies and the politicians they own. Please send a letter to your representative and tell them to vote NO on HR 5682 by clicking the link. This from the LVC / +Gene Karpinski, League of Conservation Voters 

League of Conservation Voters

Urgent Action Needed: KXL Could Pass Tomorrow!
There’s literally no time to waste, so I’m going to get right to it: The Keystone XL pipeline, the massive environmental threat that we’ve been battling against for years, will be voted on in the House tomorrow. A Senate vote is also on the way, so now more than ever we need our voices to be heard if we are going to stop this pipeline.
You and I know the facts — Keystone poses a huge risk to our lands, water, climate, and our planet’s future. Tar sands oil is the dirtiest fuel on the planet, and with an atrocious safety record for the company behind Keystone XL, spills in America’s heartland could be imminent. There’s no question about it: Keystone is all risk and no reward. We have just hours to act.
Our country has relied on dirty fossil fuels for too long. There was a time when it seemed there was no way around using fossil fuels for energy, but that’s not the case anymore. So why are so many members of Congress hell-bent on continuing to invest in dirty oil?
There have been enormous advancements in clean energy, and President Obama has made it clear that our country needs to act on climate change now. From the EPA’s historic Clean Power Plan to Tuesday’s agreement with China to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, our country is moving forward in the fight against climate change.
But if Keystone XL is built, we will be taking a giant step backward. We will be playing right into Big Oil’s hands — keeping us addicted to oil is exactly what they need to pad their wallets even more. We can fight back, but we have to act now before the House votes tomorrow.
Time and time again we have marched, petitioned, and DEMANDED that the Keystone XL pipeline be rejected. And the incredible thing is that President Obama has heard us. That’s why when he announced his climate action plan last year, he emphasized that Keystone’s impact on climate change should determine whether or not the pipeline is built. Now we need to make sure our representatives in the House hear us too. There’s not a moment to spare — contact your member right now and tell them to vote NO on Keystone XL.
Craig, thank you for keeping up the fight. We can stop Keystone, but we can’t do it without you.
Kristin Signature
Kristin Brown
Director of Digital Strategy
League of Conservation Voters

1920 L Street, NW Suite 800
Washington, DC 20036
202-785-8683
lcv-optim-share-donate.png

05 September 2014

Think the Southwest’s Drought Is Bad Now? It Could Last a Generation or More & Should You Grill With Charcoal or Gas? ECONUNDRUMS YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL DILEMMAS SOLVED 3&1SEP14

THE drought in California and the American West, especially the Southwest, is extremely bad, and believe it or not it is only going to get worse. The growing conflict between agriculture and urban demands for water is getting worse, and it is only a matter of time before violence erupts somewhere over water allocations. The California legislature has shown great political courage in passing legislation (the Gov Brown needs to sign) regulating ground water pumping. While governments and industries alike should have already been investing in water desalination facilities along the West coast it is not to late to do so. BANS ON FRACKING must be imposed in all areas experiencing drought. FRACKING requires huge amounts of water these areas can not afford to loose. FRACKING pollutes surface and ground water and increases air pollution in the areas it is used. The environmental and economic damage in drought areas from FRACKING far exceeds any benefit from such drilling.  Urban areas must do more to limit water consumption like xenotropic landscaping and minimal water use appliances with heavy, mandatory fines for violations. Government must be ready with tax credits and low interest loans for consumers installing American made minimal use appliances and converting their property to xenotropic landscaping. Farmers must convert their crops to those appropriate for the region and minimize their use of water with conservation methods like drip irrigation. If more water than what is delivered by drip irrigation is needed for their crops then another crop must be considered. The government must be ready to offer financial assistance (tax breaks and low interest loans) for farmers to convert to minimal water use methods and crops. These methods will require a massive amount of spending and subsidies by government and corporate America, including big agribusiness, must pay their fair share. To continue on, taking only the minimal action required will hasten the environmental and economic disaster that is fast approaching with a price tag that will far exceed the cost of implementing drastic water use reform now. From +Mother Jones .....

Think the Southwest’s Drought Is Bad Now? It Could Last a Generation or More

| Wed Sep. 3, 2014 5:55 AM EDT
Irrigation pipes on Southern California farmland.
Late-summer 2014 has brought uncomfortable news for residents of the US Southwest—and I'm not talking about 109-degree heat in population centers like Phoenix.
A new study by Cornell University, the University of Arizona, and the US Geological Survey researchers looked at the deep historical record (tree rings, etc.) and the latest climate change models to estimate the likelihood of major droughts in the Southwest over the next century. The results are as soothing as a thick wool sweater on a midsummer desert hike.
The researchers concluded that odds of a decadelong drought are "at least 80 percent." The chances of a "megadrought," one lasting 35 or more years, stands at somewhere between 20 percent and 50 percent, depending on how severe climate change turns out to be. And the prospects for an "unprecedented 50-year megadrought"—one "worse than anything seen during the last 2000 years"­—checks in at a nontrivial 5 to 10 percent.
To the right there's a map, pulled from the study, showing that the swath of land in question and its risk of a 35-year drought. It extends from Southern California clear to West Texas, encompassing population centers like San Diego, Phoenix, Tucson, and Albuquerque, along with a large chunk of the troubled US-Mexico border. (Note that in northern Mexico, drought prospects are even higher.)
This (paradoxically) chilling assessment comes on the heels of another study (study; my summary), this one released in early August by University of California-Irvine and NASA researchers, on the Colorado River, the lifeblood of a vast chunk of the Southwest. As many as 40 million people rely on the Colorado for drinking water, including residents of Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Tucson, and San Diego. It also irrigates the highly productive winter farms of California's Imperial Valley and Arizona's Yuma County, which produce upwards of 80 percent of the nation's winter vegetables.
The researchers analyzed satellite measurements of the Earth's mass and found that the region's aquifers had undergone a much-larger-than-expected drawdown over the past decade—the region's farms and municipalities responded to drought-reduced flows from the Colorado River by dropping wells and tapping almost 53 million acre-feet of underground water between December 2004 and November 2013—equal to about 1.5 full Lake Meads drained off in just nine years, a rate the study's lead researcher, Jay Famiglietti, calls "alarming."
Considering how much of the Colorado River Basin, which encompasses swaths of Utah, Colorado, California, Arizona, and New Mexico, are desert, it's probably not wise to rapidly drain aquifers, since there's little prospect that they'll refill anytime soon. And when you consider that that the region faces high odds of a coming megadrought, the results are even more frightening. (Just before Labor Day, over fierce opposition from farm interests, the California Legislature passed legislation that would regulate groundwater pumping—something that has never been done on a statewide basis in California before. Gov. Jerry Brown is expected to sign it into law.)
Yet another study, this one released in mid-August by researchers from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the US Geological Survey and covered by my colleague Julia Lurie here, found that the drought now gripping most of California has been so severe that it has caused the state's mountain ranges to rise by as much as a half inch since 2013 alone. That's because water, in the form of snow on mountain peaks and flow in streams, weighs down on the tectonic plate upon which the mountains rest. When it's not replaced, as happens during a drought, the plate rises "like an uncoiled spring," as the Scripps Institution of Oceanography put it in a press release. Scripps added, thankfully, that the "uplift has virtually no effect on the San Andreas fault and therefore does not increase the risk of earthquakes." Whew.
But the "uplift effect" doesn't just happen in mountain areas. The researchers estimate that across the West, loss of surface water has caused the land to rise 0.15 of an inch since 2013. Such a tangible change over so short a time illustrates the "the dire hydrological state of the West," the Scripps press release states.

04 September 2014

Pennsylvania Makes Public 243 Cases of Fracking Contaminated Water 29AUG14

FRACKING is polluting the ground water in Pennsylvania and around the nation, here are 243 cases proving this fact. Gov corbett r tb PA and the repiglican / tea-bagger controlled commonwealth government in Harrisburg have been corrupted by the gas and oil industries, failing to investigate and even covering up water contamination and health problems to protect these industries. There is help from scientific and environmental organizations for communities fighting to protect their residents and water supplies and the residents of Pennsylvania can also fight back by voting for candidates who will best protect their health and environment this November. From +Daily Kos .....
Sherry Vargson, of Granville Summit, PA, lighting her fracking-contaminated tap water.
Sherry Vargson, of Granville Summit, PA, lighting her fracking-contaminated tap water.
The state of Pennsylvania has released redacted details of 243 cases of water contamination caused by fracking and related activities by the natural gas industry. Claims made by the fracking industry that they have not contaminated water are utter rubbish. These 243 cases which took place in Pennsylvania between 2008 and 2014 involve a wide range of contamination problems including the contamination of multiple water supply wells by one fracking operation.  State officials did not indicate how many more cases of contamination may have occurred since 2008 that are not included in this list.
The 243 cases, from 2008 to 2014, include some where a single drilling operation impacted multiple water wells. The problems listed in the documents include methane gas contamination, spills of wastewater and other pollutants, and wells that went dry or were otherwise undrinkable. Some of the problems were temporary, but the names of landowners were redacted, so it wasn't clear if the problems were resolved to their satisfaction. Other complaints are still being investigated
Here is an example case I went to semi-randomly.
It is clear that fracking has been causing wide ranging water problems but the industry has pressed hard to keep them from being made public. Pennsylvania's inspector general has admitted the problems with fracking have overwhelmed state regulators.
 
The release of contamination information also comes about a month after a report from the state’s Inspector General that found that the rapid growth of the state’s gas industry “caught the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) unprepared to effectively administer laws and regulations to protect drinking water and unable to efficiently respond to citizen complaints.”
They repeatedly lied to us in North Carolina in public meetings which I attended that there were no documented cases of fracking contamination of water supplies.  North Carolina Republicans were given dog and poly show tours of Pennsylvania gas wells. They came back with glowing reports selling fracking to North Carolinians.
State Sen. Bob Rucho returned from a taxpayer-funded trip to Pennsylvania's shale gas drilling region talking about green pastures and cows - not drinking water contamination or health concerns.
"I was impressed with the best industry practices they've established," he said, dismissing complaints about shale gas extraction as erroneous or exaggerated. "What we saw was green grass and cows grazing."
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/...
The fracking industry was lying to North Carolina's state representatives and citizens.
Those lies have now been exposed.
A permanent moratorium on expanding fracking to new areas needs to be declared now to stop more water from being contaminated and to remedy deficiencies in regulation that are alllowing water to be contaminated in violation of federal water quality laws.

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO FISHOUTOFWATER ON FRI AUG 29, 2014 AT 02:12 PM EDT.

ALSO REPUBLISHED BY NORTH CAROLINA BLUE AND DK GREENROOTS.

The following list identifies cases where DEP determined that a private water supply was impacted by oil and 
gas activities. The oil and gas activities referenced in the list below include operations associated with both 
conventional and unconventional drilling activities that either resulted in a water diminution event or an 
increase in constituents above background conditions. This list is intended to identify historic water supply 
impacts and does not necessarily represent ongoing impacts. Many of the water supply complaints listed 
below have either returned to background conditions, have been mitigated through the installation of water 
treatment controls or have been addressed through the replacement of the original water supply. This list is 
dynamic in nature and will be updated to reflect new water supply impacts as they are reported to DEP and a 
determination is made; however, the list will retain cases of water supply impacts even after the impact has 
been resolved.
A redacted copy of the water supply determination letter/order can be viewed by clicking on the “Complaint 
#” or “ORDER” cell in the table. Each row on the list represents a single water supply determination. A single 
water supply determination may be represented by multiple “Complaint #s” (i.e., when more than one 
Complaint # is included in the same row) and, conversely, separate water supplies may be identified using 
the same “Complaint #” (i.e., when multiple rows list the same Complaint #). The list also identifies the 
municipality and county where each water supply is located along with the date of the water supply 
determination letter or the date the order was issued.