From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 1 10:11:14 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:11:14 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> NC: meeting to review illegal dumping of sewage sludge at airport Message-ID: Published on Friday, August 01, 2008 Municipal leaders call sludge meeting By Jennifer Calhoun Staff writer Officials from two cities have called a meeting to discuss problems at the Laurinburg-Maxton Airport Industrial Site. Laurinburg councilmen and Maxton commissioners say they want to meet with airport officials to find out more about a series of illegal sludge dumps at the airport?s wastewater treatment plant in 2006. The municipal leaders also want to discuss the plant?s continued failures of state water toxicity tests, as well as possible funding ideas for a new airport runway. The meeting is set for 7 p.m. Tuesday in the airport lobby, 16701 Airport Road in Maxton. Ann Slaughter, who was recently appointed to the airport?s board, said the public never got a good explanation of the dumping that has cost the airport nearly $200,000 in fines, legal fees and clean up costs. A former employee of the plant is suspected of intentionally dumping the sludge to save the airport money, but the State Bureau of Investigation has not filed charges. Slaughter said there are still unanswered questions about how the sludge dump could have happened without detection. Laurinburg and Maxton officials ?want to know how it happened, and why it wasn?t caught earlier,? she said. ?They want to get a better feel for what took place there, and how everything would be handled in the future.? Dr. Matthew Block, mayor of Laurinburg, said officials also wanted to know more about the on-going problem of contamination at the plant. ?Given the importance of it, the city councils wanted to dedicate an evening to hearing the status,? he said. Failed tests The wastewater treatment plant has failed every state water toxicity test this year, resulting in at least $6,000 in additional fines, said Belinda Henson, a spokeswoman for the state Division of Water Quality. The tests do not show what is causing the toxicity, Henson said. At the urging of the division, the airport contracted with Meritech Inc. Environmental Labs to find out more about the contamination. ?They?ll do all the testing, more than we can, in an effort to try to identify what?s causing it,? said Paul Davis, airport director. Davis said he did not think the contamination at the wastewater plant was affecting drinking water. Officials were also interested in talking about funding options for a new runway that could accommodate larger planes. The new runway could cost $16 million to $20 million, Davis said. The called meeting is fairly unusual, said Dolores ?Dee? Hammond, who has served as Laurinburg?s city clerk for years. ?They?ve only had a couple of (joint) meetings that I remember,? she said. The airport is considered to be a joint project to bring industry to the communities. It is largely funded through its own operations. http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=300774 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 1 14:27:52 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:27:52 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Nanoparticles In Sewage Could Escape Into Bodies Of Water Message-ID: Nanoparticles In Sewage Could Escape Into Bodies Of Water ScienceDaily (July 28, 2008) In a conventional sewage works, nanoparticles should really be bound in the sludge and should not represent a major problem in the aqueous effluent. This is not true, however, as shown by a new study of the ceramic model material cerium dioxide. An astonishing amount was able to leave an experimental sewage works and thus could possibly enter bodies of water. The industry needs large amounts of cerium dioxide (CeO2) to grind computer components and mobile phone camera lenses or the lasers in CD players. Thousands of tons of this substance are used throughout the world. But what happens when this or other nano-substances get into the environment, especially sewage, and thereby enter sewage works? Is the problem solved because nanoparticles largely agglomerate, i.e. clump together? Particles survive unbound Not at all, according to a new study by the research group led by Wendelin Stark, Assistant Professor at the Institute for Chemical and Bioengineering, which has just appeared in the journal Environmental Science and Technology. The majority of the cerium dioxide particles actually do bond to the surface of bacteria in the sewage sludge and can thus be removed from the water. However, far more particles than was assumed are able to pass through the biological separation stage. Stark says, Intuitively, we presumed that practically 100 percent of the cerium oxide particles would remain trapped in the sewage sludge. After all, the particles should form clumps and sink to the bottom. Therefore at the start of the project they had thought that all the particles could simply be precipitated out. However, through numerous experiments in a test sewage plant, the scientists discovered that up to six percent by weight of the particles entered the sewage works effluent. Since the experiments were carried out at relatively high nanoparticle concentrations (100 ppm), the researchers suspect that agglomeration, i.e. clumping together, is likely to be impeded even more at lower concentrations. Therefore oxide nanoparticles that get into the effluent must not be regarded as unproblematic, because the route taken by the particles after the sewage works has scarcely been researched up to now. Bacteria help nanoparticles The researchers at ETH Zurich, the University of Applied Sciences W??denswil and the BMG Engineering AG Company then began a series of experiments to find out how the oxide nanoparticles pass through the sewage plant almost unimpeded. Here again, the resear??chers met with a surprise. Stark stresses that, The particles disperse astonishingly well and do not agglomerate entirely as was assumed. The bacteria living in the activated sludge involuntarily share responsibility for this dispersion. They excrete soap-like substances to avoid forming clumps with one another. However, these anti-clumping agents and other components of the aqueous effluent also stabilise the nanoparticles. Thus a proportion of the material is not sufficiently agglomerated and can leave the sewage works practically unchanged. For Wendelin Stark, this research work is a stroke of luck from which all the participants have profited greatly. The work arose from an initiative by co-author Robert Bereiter, a member of the staff of the University of Applied Sciences Wadenswil, and Renof BMG Engineering. The researchers were able to carry out the tests in the companys own experimental sewage plant under real conditions and in accordance with OECD standards. The sewage sludge for the experiments originated from the activated sludge tanks of the Werdh plant, Zurichs biggest sewage works. Disposed of with the sewage sludge Elisabeth Miller and Roger Wepf from the Electron Microscopy Centre (EMEZ) of ETH Zurich prepared electron microscope images of sewage sludge with nanoparticles, showing impressively that the nanoparticles accumulate at the surface of the bacteria. At the same time, a large proportion of the nanoparticles remains in the sewage sludge. In Switzerland this sludge is incinerated, but in other countries it is still used as fertiliser. Cerium dioxide is a popular model compound for studies of this kind, and is also used industrially in rapidly increasing amounts. Titanium oxide, a white pigment and an ingredient in many suncreams, behaves in a similar way to cerium dioxide and is already used in huge quantities. Under the experimental conditions both substances are stabilised in a way similar to that in a sewage works. Other soluble nanoparticles, e.g. iron oxide, are stabilised to a distinctly lesser extent. This is why they are also easier to remove from the environment. Wendelin Stark says, However, we are still at the beginning of nano-safety research. Further investigations must follow. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Journal reference: Limbach et al. Removal of Oxide Nanoparticles in a Model Wastewater Treatment Plant: Influence of Agglomeration and Surfactants on Clearing Efficiency. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008; 0 (0): 0 DOI: 10.1021/es800091f From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 1 20:58:02 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 20:58:02 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Oregon Landowner paid to take sludge - they can't give it away.. Message-ID: Subject: OREGON - LANDOWNER PAID TO TAKE SLUDGE Highlights: "The council approved the application of biosolids on a 107-acre parcel of land near Lewis and Clark Road, as the city needs a new summer biosolids application area. Biosolids refers to treated sludge which is the byproduct of the treatment of domestic wastewater in a wastewater treatment plant." "Wallace said the city has entered into a tentative agreement with the parcel?s owner where the city would use 80 acres of his parcel. ?It?s a five-year lease, with a five-year renewal option,? Wallace said. ?It would be a $6,500 annual lease payment.? http://www.seasidesignal.com/articles/2008/08/01/news/local_news/doc48932cd6316fa999326173.txt Council approves engineering plan for new athletic field (Created: Friday, August 1, 2008 8:50 AM PDT) Donald Allison Seaside City Councilors agreed Monday night to spend $69,085 on the final engineering plan for the new athletic field slated for Broadway Park. The engineering firm Cameron, McCarthy, Gilbert, and Schiebe will do the plan, and it will include all elements of the sport fields, including lighting, fencing, irrigation, drainage, dugouts, bullpens, scoreboard, parking lot, and future seating. Public Works Director Neal Wallace said the work would also include design, project coordination, meeting schedules, and the preparation of construction documents. Wallace said once the plan is done, the Broadway Park Field Project would be ready to be put out to bid. ?What will be necessary is to procure the balance of the funding needed,? Wallace said. Council President Stubby Lyons said the same engineering firm designed the Olympic trials field in Eugene, and Wallace said they also designed the field at Oregon State University in Corvallis. Jason Boyd, Chairman of the City of Seaside Parks Committee, said previously that the Broadway Park project would cost $1.2 million, and would create a soccer, football and baseball field all in one. Also Monday, the council adopted a system development charge methodology for parks and recreation, and wastewater. It also approved a resolution increasing system development fees for parks and recreation, and wastewater. The charge for an average new home or business will rise from $325 to $783 for parks and recreation, and from $675 to $4,882 for wastewater. The council approved the application of biosolids on a 107-acre parcel of land near Lewis and Clark Road, as the city needs a new summer biosolids application area. Biosolids refers to treated sludge which is the byproduct of the treatment of domestic wastewater in a wastewater treatment plant. Wallace said the city has entered into a tentative agreement with the parcel?s owner where the city would use 80 acres of his parcel. ?It?s a five-year lease, with a five-year renewal option,? Wallace said. ?It would be a $6,500 annual lease payment.? Wallace said the city would now wait for approval of the agreement from Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 2 09:54:09 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 09:54:09 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Terminology BS Courtesy of Synagro Baltimore Message-ID: Synagro thinks that they can change the meaning of words to anything that strikes their fancy. Lets start with the facts: Sludge is not 'raw untreated sewage' (as Synagro claims in the letter below). Raw untreated sewage is called 'sewage'. 'Sewage sludge' is the term for the solids material that is separated from sewage in a sewage treatment plant. 'Sewage sludge' is the proper technical term for these solids. Sewage sludge is federally regulated in the USA by the Part 503 regulations. What is the terminology used in the regulations to describe sewage sludge? Answer: "Sewage sludge". Class A sewage sludge, Class B sewage sludge. Land applied sewage sludge Incincerated sewage sludge. It is all sewage sludge. The term "biosolids' does not appear in the regulations. The wastewater industry held a contest to rename 'sewage sludge' into something that sounds 'wholesome'. The contest winning word they invented was 'biosolids'. At that time the term 'biosolids' was supposed to be a pretty synonym for 'sewage sludge'. Here you see the sludge industry in a shameless attempt to confuse the public by misnaming the the wastes that flow into and flow from a sewage treatment plant. For a well written history of the term 'biosolids' - read The Sludge Hits the Fan - from "Toxic Sludge is Good for You" http://www.ejnet.org/sludge/sludge.html .................................................................................................. Don't confuse 'sludge' and 'biosolids' August 2, 2008 Regarding statements made about biosolids last month by Northampton County District Attorney and Democratic attorney general candidate John Morganelli, which The Morning Call's John Micek referenced in his July 16 blog: Synagro does not generate ''sludge'' or biosolids anywhere. We manage biosolids -- treated, environmentally approved materials only ??? that are generated in local communities for use as farm fertilizer. This practice is the subject of a lot of misinformation, and a lot of ''scare'' stories. So it's important to set the record straight. There is a huge difference between biosolids and sludge. Sludge is raw, untreated sewage. No one should spread sludge on farms, and we do not do so. Biosolids are treated, stable organic fertilizers that are regulated and approved by both the federal EPA and the Pennsylvania DEP. Synagro spreads biosolids material for free on farms across the state, saving Pennsylvania farmers millions of dollars every year in fertilizer costs. Using this environmentally friendly material has another benefit: it reduces the use of commercial fertilizers, most of which are fuel-based. Communities across Pennsylvania and in many other states contract with Synagro and other firms to handle the biosolids produced from wastewater treatment. They do so because by law they must treat the materials that get flushed or sent down the drainpipe. Synagro offers state-of-the-art technologies to treat these materials, including biosolids, according to strict standards. When communities choose the technologies that they require to handle their needs, Synagro implements that choice ??? and we do it to the very highest standards of quality and service. Lisa Williams Regional director, technical services Synagro Central LLC Baltimore http://www.mcall.com/news/opinion/letters/all-williams.6524007aug02,0,5168288.story From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 2 09:57:16 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2008 09:57:16 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> food may be at risk Message-ID: ONTARIO: Food may be at risk 26.jul.08 The Observer Jesse Mclean http://www.theobserver.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1131485 The federal government's behind-doors decision to cut funding for food inspections at meat plants will threaten Canadians' food safety, a local politician said. Jeff Wesley, the federal Liberal candidate in Lambton- Kent-Middlesex, said the government's plan to reduce funding to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) will undermine the system. "Understand that 99.9 per cent of our farmers and what they produce are first class . . . But it's appalling that the Conservatives are willing to threaten the health of Canadians to save a few bucks," he said. Under the changes -- confidentially approved by Ottawa last fall, but partially leaked to the media in mid- July -- the food inspection agency would check company records while the industry would be in charge of inspections, said Freeman Libby of the CFIA. Wesley said the changes give too much control to large meat packing companies, which have seen a concentration of ownership in recent years. He said if something does go wrong because of "a lack of inspections," Canadian farmers will bear the brunt of the damage, as their food would no longer be marketable for export. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 5 14:43:42 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:43:42 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> ON Farmers not compensated re Clean Water Act - no private wells protected Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: There has been a severe falling off in the protection of rural drinking water sources. The Liberal government decided that 'source water protection' meant on 'urban treated municipally delivered drinking water' protection. So even though those of us who sat on the Walkerton Inquiry understood that all of Ontario's drinking water sources were to be protected, the Liberals decided this is not the case. So in keeping with this new latitude to allow the contamination of private rural aquifers and drinking wells - farmers and rural residents are not protected by the provisions of the Clean Water Act. To compound the problem, the province proposes to do away with Certificates of Approval (waste permits) for the land application of sewage sludge biosolids. This means that the permits - which are public documents - would no longer government sludge spreading operations. Moving sludge to the Nutrient Management Act also hamstrings a municipality's ability to protect ground water and rural drinking water and public health by passing municipal bylaws that would restrict sludge use. Ontario residents who want to see their farmland, water sources, and food protected from sewage sludge contamination need to write to Minister on Environment Gerretsen and Minister of Agriculture Dombrowski to protest the proposed removal of the Certificate of Approval requirements. ............................................................................ http://farmersforum.com/AUG2008/p8.htm Clean Water Act a threat until compensation addressed, farmers say Farmers Forum - Ontario - August 2008 ALFRED ??? A growing number of farmers are insiting that compensation be included in the Clean Water Act. "The word compensation is a dirty word," because Ministry of Environment officials don???t want to talk about it, said Prescott County Federation of Agriculture vice-president and dairy farmer, Reg Presley at a July meeting in Alfred, east of Ottawa. Yet it is the very word that needs to be included in the terms of reference of the Act, he insists. "We have to lobby to have compensation included. We won???t be able to get compensation when we are affected unless we have it included now." St. Bernardin dairy farmer, Guy Levac, told attending Glengarry-Prescott-Russell MPP Jean Marc Lalonde: "What does Ontario run on? It???s not the auto industry. It???s not Toronto. It???s farmers. Why do you not care about the farmers?" Levac emphasized that cooperation of MPPs was needed to place compensation in the terms of reference. Farmers applauded Levac when he said: "It???s easy for you to do if you have the will to do it." The issue is a matter of fairness, said Terry Otto, Ontario Federation of Agriculture executive member and Metcalfe farmer. "We don???t want to screw the system. But neither do we want to be screwed by the system." As it stands, municipalities will be able to target three specific areas for source water protection: land within 100 metres of a municipal well head, land near a cluster of privately owned wells and any land within 200-metres of a municipal drinking water intake pipe. What that means to a farmer may take five years to play out. At a Kingston meeting, Environment Minister John Gerretsen told farmers that there would never be enough money to compensate people for changes they may have to make to conform with the Clean Water Act and affected property owners will have to live with it. Ontario Federation of Agriculture executive member Mark Wales said the spreading of biosolids on farmland is included in the province???s list of risks to drinking water sources. Noted Wales: "Does this tell us something about the ministry???s approach to protecting drinking water sources for the citizens of Ontario?" http://farmersforum.com/AUG2008/p8.htm From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 5 14:49:38 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 14:49:38 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Power from cow poo heats homes Message-ID: In Depth Power from cow poo heats homes Biogass facilities that turn manure into methane are popping up nationwide By Wendy Lyons Sunshine Huckabay Ridge biogas facility in Stephenville, Texas. Photo courtesy Wendy Lyons Sunshine At the Huckabay Ridge biogas facility in Stephenville, Texas, a life preserver and a ???No Swimming??? sign hanging on the concrete exterior of one chocolate-colored pool are somebody???s idea of a barnyard joke. Early this year, the manure from 10,000 cows from Texas??? Erath County began stoking this facility, which is expected to produce enough pipeline-quality methane to power 11,000 homes. During my visit there, the odor outside is surprisingly mild ??? comparable to an ordinary stable, even though the operation sits next to an existing commercial composter. Dried manure from local dairies has been trucked in and combined with cooking grease and other food waste to create the soupy brown concoction that now sloshes through open-air vats and into enclosed silos. Inside the air-conditioned office, round-the-clock workers keep tabs on the process and maximize output using a web-based computer system. ???We???re borrowing the manure for 20 days, then we give the compost yard the residues,??? explains Mark Hall, senior vice president of Environmental Power Corp., which owns and operates the facility. More than 64,000 cows call the windy, rolling pastures of Erath County home. Each of these hard-working beasts delivers thousands of gallons of milk each year, and something else, too ??? more than 100 pounds of waste, per cow, per day. By any measure, Erath County is knee-deep in manure. To cope with so much excrement, dairy farmers spread some on fields or send it off to composting facilities, but most often they???ll shovel it into noxious lagoons where decomposing manure wafts pungent odors and leaks unwelcome contaminants into watersheds. These days, though, the need for sustainable green energy has given manure new purpose: It???s an increasingly popular source of a type of biofuel. During the natural decomposition process, dung heaps release fumes, typically referred to as ???biogas.??? More than half of all biogas is methane ??? the same high-energy fuel traditionally drilled and extracted from underground wells as natural gas. Through a process called anaerobic digestion, bacteria break down manure in the absence of oxygen, releasing methane and other gases like carbon dioxide. Methane extracted from biogas can be used like any other natural gas to heat homes or fuel electric utility plants. Savvy farmers already harness biogas to power their own operations, but with natural gas prices skyrocketing, manure-generated methane has begun to help power the energy grid. By the end of this year, more biogas facilities will come online at dairies across the country. New plants are in construction in Texas and California, joining similar facilities in Wisconsin and elsewhere. When compared to traditional livestock waste management, these biogas operations are a ???clear environmental win,??? says Nathanael Greene, Director of Renewable Energy Policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. ???These large [livestock] systems in many cases put out more waste than some of our largest cities. It???s really staggering how much poop these systems produce,??? he says. State-of-the-art anaerobic digesters reduce the waste???s volume, and their high temperature helps purify it, making it less bio-reactive and better fertilizer. By repurposing biogas as fuel, says Greene: ???You???re avoiding raw methane releases, which have 23 times the climate warming potential of CO2.??? Having 1.7 million dairy cows of its own, California views biogas facilities as an opportunity to slash its output of global warming methane by up to 90-percent. Spurred by the state???s mandate to increase renewable green energy, Pacific Gas & Electric Company now buys ???cow power??? from Vintage Dairy and neighboring Pier Van Der Hoek Dairy in Fresno County. Rather than enclosed silos, these dairies use covered manure lagoons to generate and capture the biogas. The methane is purified at Vintage???s site before getting pumped out to the pipeline. (This facility doesn???t currently add food waste to augment the manure???s methane output.) These Fresno herds total 11,400 cows, and their manure is expected to power 2,500 homes. Manure may be a dirty biz, but thanks to biogas reclamation, the barnyard is now full of four-legged, mooing gas wells. http://www.plentymag.com/features/2008/08/power_from_cow_poo_heats_homes.php From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 6 02:39:11 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:39:11 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Mexico "Gourmet Soil" from "Huma-Clean" to enter USA Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: More claims and promises from "Homeland Security Network" aka "Global Ecology Corporation"... the company intending to bring in some kind of sewage sludge mixture from Juarez, Mexico (known as 'Gourmet Soil'). As I understand the regulations, the USA may not transport sewage sludge for land application into Mexico. So will Mexico be allowed to send this sewage sludge for land application in the USA's Central Valley? Is the EPA was going to look into this? ...................................................... Global Ecology Corporation Initiates First Domestic Water and Soil Remediation Proposals Last update: 12:22 p.m. EDT Aug. 5, 2008 KEASBEY, N.J., Aug 05, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Homeland Security Network (Pink Sheets:HSYN), doing business as Global Ecology Corporation (GEC), announced today that it has taken sludge samples from its first four potential water and soil remediation projects in the U.S. and will submit proposals to the appropriate regulatory authorities as soon as the samples are quantified. The company believes the proposals will meet the needs and requirements and should result in projects starting in the next 45 days. The projects, two in Florida and two in New Jersey, will deploy the use of both the remediation process for extracted sludge and for "in place" remediation of the lake bottom sludge, which can reduce polluted sediment volume by up to 75%. This technique is especially desirable where dredging is either physically impossible or not economically feasible. Peter Ubaldi, GEC's president said, "These projects are perfect examples of our company's market-place advantage over competing technologies. We can treat contaminated locations where others cannot and our remediated byproduct produces one of the finest naturally fertilized organic soil in the world." Additionally, the company confirmed that a large California farming consortium has ordered initial samples of its "Gourmet Soil" now being produced by the company's joint venture project with Huma-Clean in Juarez, Mexico. GEC projects the total yield for Juarez will exceed 8.5 million tons of organic soil over the next three to four years. William Merritt, director of business development said, "Recent studies estimate that several hundred thousand farming acres in California's Central Valley have been vacated due to poor soil conditions. We have submitted our soil samples for certified analysis and strongly believe that our product can economically and efficiently solve the soil problems currently being experienced in the region." About Global Ecology Corporation Through their extensive network, Global Ecology Corporation (GEC) has obtained exclusive rights to several EPA-approved technologies in the water treatment and soil remediation fields. This proprietary technology helps reduce algae, bottom sludge and harmful bacteria and is able to provide "green" and if needed, transportable methods to recover the usability of water, soil and land. Global Ecology also has initiatives in the GPS and fleet tracking industries. For more information, please visit http://www.geco.us. An investment profile on Global Ecology may be found at http://www.hawkassociates.com/profile/hsyn.cfm. Investors may contact President Peter Ubaldi at 732-738-8031 Frank Hawkins at Hawk Associates, at 305-451-1888, e-mail: global.ecology at hawkassociates.com. To receive future releases in e-mail alerts, sign up at http://www.hawkssociates.com/about/alert. This news release includes forward-looking statements regarding, among other things, the company's business and financial plans, strategies and prospects. Although the company believes that its plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by these forward-looking statements are reasonable, it cannot provide assurance that it will achieve or realize these plans, intentions or expectations. Forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this news release may be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as: believe, expect, anticipate, should, planned, will, may, intend, estimated, and potential, among others. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made in this news release include market conditions and those set forth in any reports or documents that the company may publicly file from time to time. All forward-looking statements attributable to the company or a person acting on its behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary language. SOURCE: Global Ecology Corporation Global Ecology Corporation, Keasbey Peter Ubaldi, 732-738-8031 or Hawk Associates Frank Hawkins, 305-451-1888 global.ecology at hawkassociates.com http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/global-ecology-corporation-initiates-first/story.aspx?guid=%7B327C0904-3FE1-43BA-BD3D-E761DE396580%7D&dist=hppr From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 6 08:32:04 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2008 08:32:04 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> A jolly little sludge video from Brown, Chaney, Brobst, Toffey Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Here is the narrative of another jolly little video about the safety of sewage sludge biosolids from industry and academic sludge shills. They suggest that sludge is only domestic waste water, and don't focus on the fact that sludge biosolids include industrial and hospital and laboratory wastes. Look at the language of the filmn onthe absolute safety of sludge : the video claims sludge " solids are also processed to eliminate any disease causing bacteria, viruses, and parasites." That is a whopper indeed. Among other dubious assertions, note that they say that sewage treatment plants create 'purified' water that can safely be returned to rivers, lakes and oceans. Odd. That is not in keeping with what scientists are reporting. Scientists are noting that hormones, endocrine disruptors, surfactants, pathogens, antibiotics, pharmceuticals, recreational drugs and sanitizers that are lacing the sludges and effluents from sewage treatment plants. But the sludge "mis- informercial" goes as follows: ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; Formatting is better in this PDF format: http://www.cluin.org/download/misc/transcripts/biosolids.pdf Biosolids Recycling: Restore, Reclaim, Remediate The program opens with shots of a family in a kitchen. We see bottles and cans landing in a recycling container. We then see shots of recycling trucks and workers in a residential neighborhood collecting materials. We also see household recyclable materials being sorted at a transfer facility.These shots then dissolve to shots of a washing machine being loaded, a shower being turned on, someone washing dishes, and a close up of a hand flushing a toilet. Narrator: Community based recycling programs are more popular than ever. Reducing the waste stream to already jammed landfills by recycling plastic, glass, metal, and paper just makes sense. It also makes environment awareness part of our daily routine. Most people don???t realize though, that the 200 gallons of wastewater a typical family of four generates every day can also be recycled. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2 2Narrator: Once wastewater leaves a home, it???s processed at treatment facilities where liquids are separated from solids, purified, and then safely returned to waterways. The solids are also processed to eliminate any disease causing bacteria, viruses, and parasites. What remains is a nutrient rich natural fertilizer, known as biosolids. For years, these biosolids were inefficiently landfilled, ocean dumped, or incinerated. But today, with restrictions tightening and costs for landfilling and ocean dumping rising, communities are realizing the benefits of biosolids recycling. The animated title: ???Biosolids Recycling: Restore, Reclaim, Remediate??? appears. We them see shots of biosolids being used on farmland.Narrator: Currently, agricultural is the number one outlet for biosolids. Through biosolids application, rich organic nutrients can be restored to overworked soils, thereby increasing crop yields. In many regions, biosolids are provided to farms free of charge, reducing costs to farmers, and in turn to consumers. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 3A graphic showing the location of biosolid reclaimed coal mines in Pennsylvania is shown along with live shots of the surface coal mines as the narrator continues. Narrator: Restoring nutrients to agricultural lands seems the most logical application for biosolids, but alternative uses have been in use for years. In the bituminous coal fields of north-central Pennsylvania, biosolids are used as a soil amendment to reclaim surface mines. After spent mines are backfilled and recontoured, biosolids are incorporated into the soil. The soil is then reseeded as the final step of the reclamation program. John Uzupis of Wheelabrator Water Technologies is introduced, and explains along with the narrator the process of using the biosolids on the mines as we see more images of the reclaimed mines.John Uzipis: The field behind us is part of a mine site known as the Mountain top Mine. And the biosolids application started almost 5 years ago. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 4 4John Uzipis (cont.): Biosolids, compared to commercial fertilizer applications, have very similar germination times and initial establishment. The biosolids become much more impressive though, after the first year, when everything seems to come together and you get a bloom of growth. Biosolids, by their organic nature are slow release. So the nutrients are available as the microbes digest or decompose the material, they make the nutrients available to plant growth so its sustained for significant periods of time. A skyline shot of Philadelphia is followed with images of the city???s biosolid recycling center as Bill Toffey, the city???s Biosolid Utilization Manager is introduced. Narrator: The biosolids are trucked to the mines from Philadelphia. The city???s 72 acre Biosolid Recycling Center is one of the largest centralized biosolids processing facilities in the country, and has been recycling the solids from wastewater generated by 2.3 million people into biosolids for over 20 years. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 5 5Bill Toffey: The Philadelphia Water Department made a commitment back in the mid ???70s to the EPA and to the state that would end the practice of ocean disposal, and embrace land application of biosolids. One of our longest standing programs for recycling has been the program to use our product to reclaim bituminous strip mining lands in north-central Pennsylvania. Over the last nearly 20 years now, we???ve reclaimed about 4,000 acres of land using 700,000 tons of biosolids products. More shots of mine reclamation are shown as the narrator and Bob Brobst, Biosolids Regional Coordinator for US EPA Region 8 talk about the potential for biosolid use. Narrator: For surface mining reclamation, biosolid application is actually the preferred fertilizing program; a cost efficient, effective and eco-friendly means of restoring the land to productive wildlife habitat. But even with programs like this, one third of all biosolids being processed nationwide still remain unused.Bob Brobst: The municipalities are continuing to produce this product and most of them have established programs to either land apply, or use or dispose of this, but only 50% of the useable biosolids are actually land applied for beneficial purpose. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 6 6Shots of scientist working at the USDA Agricultural Research Service are shown as the narrator and Rufus Chaney, Chief Agronomist for that agency, explain new investigations into biosolids uses. Narrator: Developing and implementing better ways to use this excess is crucial. For the last 30 years scientists at the USDA Agricultural Research Service in Beltsville Maryland have beenexperimenting with alternative uses for biosolids. With an eye towards hazardous waste sites, and in particular contaminated smelter and mining operations, these researchers believe that biosolids have real remediation potential. Rufus Chaney: So it works good on coal mines. What does it do about zinc mine waste? I see it as a straightforward extrapolation of available knowledge applied to one of the toughest problems that the environmental agencies have: Of barren contaminated mine waste and smelter-polluted mountains that have been barren since 1950 or longer in some cases. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 7 7Narrator: Through a collaboration with US EPA???s Environmental Response Team, the USDA has found a partner that if the technology proves itself, could make a sizable dent in the surplus of municiple biosolids. Harry Compton of the US EPA / ERT is introduced and along with the narrator, explains EPA???s relationship with the USDA Harry Compton:The biosolids, or composted biosolids technology, seem to be most appropriate for metals-contaminated sites. And specifically, we???re encouraging their use at large area metal sites, where they???re looking at literally hundreds of acres, or even square miles of contaminated mine land from base metals mining or smelting. Narrator: Soil samples from these EPA sites are shipped to the USDA???s Environmental Chemistry Lab where they???re blended with composted biosolids and other amendments like limestone. As the narrator continues, animation illustrating how biosolids limit bio-availability is shown -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 8 8Narrator: These tailor-made biosolids not only jump-start plant growth by increasing fertility, they also have the ability to fix or bind heavy metals, thereby reducing their phyto and bio-availability. Simply put, the contaminants are still present in the soil, but can???t be absorbed by plants or animals. Even if they???re ingested, they remain bound as part of a compound and passed through the body. Rufus Chaney and Harry Compton return to give additional details on biosolids??? ???fixing??? abilities and how they???re used in the field. Rufus Chaney: If I add the limestone to keep the pH at say 6.5 or above, I???ve added phosphate and iron in the biosolid to bind heavy metals, including zinc and lead and cadmium. It ends up that they???re not taken up by plants and they only become less available with time. That???s because they get more deeply bound into the iron and the organic matter and the other stuff in the soil that make it non-bioavailable to plants or to animals. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 9 9Harry Compton: The USDA folks basically give me a recipe of biosolids addition and lime addition and other amendments to give me the optimum conservative treatment for the kind of application we would perform.A graphic map locating Leadville, CO dissolves into a scenic shot of the mountains of Colorado. We then see a group of people working outside followed by shots of barren lands damaged by mine tailings as the narrator continues. Narrator: With the USDA???s recommendations in hand, EPA and the state of Colorado recently teamed with the City of Denver to conduct field-scale testing along the floodplain of the Arkansas River. Mining in that region of Colorado, particularly around the town of Leadville, had been a boom to the region for over a century, but not without a cost to the regions pristine alpine environment. During seasonal flooding over the last 100 years, mine tailings were deposited along river???s bank. The silt contained elevated levels of heavy metals which killed vegetation, escalated erosion, and striped what little top soil remained. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 10 10Dr. Bernard Smith, a rancher from the area is introduced and gives some background info on the region. The narrator explains how biosolids are being used. Dr. Bernard Smith: This material from the mills entered the Arkansas River and from there, it entered the irrigation ditches, and all of these metals from the mouth of California Gulch on south. This further killed a lot of the forage on the meadows, So a lot of waste material high in metal content came down all the streams, because at that time we did not have any settling ponds for the mills. Narrator: To try to get these soils healthy enough to support plant life again, 15 to 20 truckloads of biosolids are being hauled every day over the mountains from Denver Metro???s wastewater treatment facility, which has the resources to process, custom blend, transport, and land apply biosolids.Steve Frank, of Denver???s Metro Wastewater Reclamation District is introduced and details his groups role in the remediation. Shots of their facility are also screened. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 11 11Steve Frank: We???re actually a branch of local government here in the metropolitan Denver area. We serve some 55 local governmental entities, and we provide wastewater processing for those local governments. Metro Wastewater Reclamation District???s biosolids are an excellent quality biosolids. We have an outstanding pretreatment program which prevents unwanted materials from getting here in the first place. We have an outstanding laboratory program for analyzing the biosolids, and we produce a material that far exceeds the EPA???s requirements for what???s called an EQ biosolid with respect to metals. Mike Zimmerman, EPA Region 8 On Scene Coordinator is introduced and gives some specifics on the site. Mike Zimmerman: We???ve identified 149 hot spots in the 11 mile reach here within the floodplain of the Upper Arkansas. And our objectives are to treat the worst sites first. We???re trying to encapsulate, immobilize, reduce the release of heavy metals into the river, into the environment. We???re trying to affix the heavy metals so that they???re not bio available, is our basic goal. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 12 12The narrator, along with Sally Brown of The University of Wisconsin explain the way Biosolids are blended as we see annimation and shots of the biosolids being applied to the soil . Narrator: Collaborating with biosolid specialist on site as well as in the lab has allowed researchers to experiment with different mixture ratios and application techniques on a larger scale. .Sally Brown: When you???re going to a certain site, you have to look at the site, discuss and try to figure out what the problems are at a site that are limiting plant growth, and based on that come up with a specific amendment for each site that will try and address each of those problems. What you can do with the bio solids, is mix lime directly in, its a very straightforward procedure. You use a front end loader, 1 scoop to 5 scoops, or, depending on the lime rate that you need to add. And just by turning it around a little bit with a loader, you can get a decent mix, and what you have when you add the bio solids and the lime together is the potential for the alkalinity that you???re adding with the lime to move through the profile with the bio solid so that you can not only fix the acidity at the surface 6 or 10 inches, Sally -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 13 13Brown (cont.): but hopefully you???ll get down to 24 and even further; that???s what we???ve seen in the research plots. Shots of team members gathering soil samples from the site are shown as the narrator, Dr. Smith and Bob Brobst talk about the benefits of remediating the site. Narrator: Analytical results of the pilot tests at Leadville indicate that the biosolids treated soils reduced the available metals, thereby reducing lethal toxicity to living organisms. What this means to the locals is that after almost 100 years, the land can finally be put back to productive use.Dr. Bernard Smith: As these historic mine wastes are re-vegetated, the landowners hope to have some forage suitable for raising various types of livestock. We will have an area along the Upper Arkansas River that will support fish life, be a wonderful wildlife habitat, and be an enjoyable place for people to come and play. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 14 14Another graphic map, this time locating Bunker Hill, Idaho, is shown along with shots of Sally Brown colllecting samples at the site as the narrator and Sally Brown give the details. Narrator: USDA and EPA are also collaborating at another metals site near Kellogg, Idaho. At the abandoned Bunker Hill smelter facility, airborne contaminates killed plants along the hillsides, leaving the soil susceptible to the forces of wind and rain. The erosion then striped the steep slopes of nutrient laden topsoil and any hope of natural revegitation.Sally Brown: When you have a site like this, you have problems associated with poor physical properties of a soil. That???s basically a result of there being no more organic matter left in the soil. Animation showing how biosolids deliver nutrients to poor soils is shown while Sally Brown explains. Sally Brown: Biosolids are about 50% organic matter. So when you do a heavy biosolids application, your rebuilding a lot of the organic matter in the a-horizon of the soil. Biosolids are basically your whole recommended nutrient table for plants. Nitrogen, phosphorus, some potassium, calcium, magnesium. There???s a whole long list of elements that are -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 15 15Sally Brown(cont.):essential for plant growth and biosolids basically have all of those elementsThe animation ends. Shots of scientists touring and taking samples at the site are shown as Sally Brown continues. Sally Brown: There are two aspects of the biosolids project at Bunker Hill. We???ve treated uplands with biosolids, that???s been in place for about 3 years, and we treated a wetland with a biosolids compost, and that???s been in place for about 1 year. What we used was biosolids in combination with wood ash on the hillsides. The wood ash is a locally available residual. Its very high in phosphorous and potassium and its a very high calcium carbonate equivalent material. More annimation illustrates how the biosolid and wood ash mixture adheres to the landscape. Sally Brown: In addition, when you???re mixing the biosolids and wood ash together, they get to be a very highly adhesive material, so they???ll stick to the hillsides. And so that???s why those two materials were used here. And we???ve been real happy with the results we???ve seen so far. The biosolids on the uplands portion have maintained a really -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 16 16Sally Brown(cont.): vigorous vegetative cover for the 3 years that they???ve been in place. On the wetland, what???s really nice is that now when you drive past the wetland, you hardly blink, because it looks like a wetland, like any of the wetlands in the area, whereas before it looked almost like a moonscape, like it was filled with quicksand. Shots from a public meeting in Leadville addressing biosolid application at are shown as the narrator, Rufus Chaney, and Harry Compton talk about public acceptance and safety.Narrator: Initially, the general public was somewhat skeptical of biosolid recycling. But initial fears of pathogens and naturally occurring heavy metals in biosolids are being replaced by enthusiasm due to assurances from the scientific community.Rufus Chaney: USDA can never, let???s say tolerate, let alone accept and recommend, a use of a new material like biosolids until the safety has been rigorously shown. And so in 1989-93 in the last go around in rules in 1980, and the first go around of federal rules, USDA, Food and Drug, and EPA worked together to make sure the rules protected everything of the use of that land; for gardens, for children playing, for wildlife, for livestock, for adults, for crops. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 17 17Narrator: Inviting local representatives to visit application sites and biosolid processing plants has also been beneficial. Usually, once a community realizes the cost benefits as well as the advantages over traditional treatments, they???re more willing to accept biosolids recycling as another ???green??? solution.Harry Compton: Politically its very cost-effective as well because most folks out there appreciate seeing a landscape of lush green and / or trees rather than cement or denuded landscape.Steve Luftig, Director of EPA???s Superfund program is introduced and talks about his agency???s commitment to remediating with biosolids. Steve Luftig: Its a very promising technology. Its inexpensive compared to other technologies and it takes two wastes, sludge and wasteland, mining waste, mixes them together and gets a positive result. And we???re very hopeful that as we try it more and more and learn more and more about how to apply it, how to amend the soil, how to keep it in place, what plants will grow under what conditions, that we???ll be very useful technology in the future. Rufus Chaney of USDA appears for the last time and wraps the program up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 18 18Rufus Chaney: This isn???t a one-year or one-season fix, because we correct all the problems the soil had from the pollution. Again its science, its only applied science. And what you do is hunt for the least expensive way to apply that science. You go to a Bunker Hill or a Leadville where its been dead for 30 years and its not going to recover by any natural process we know of. We apply a tailor-made iron-phosphate-rich biosolid and some carbon and we can get legumes and grasses thriving on that site within, as soon as the seeds can germinate. They???ve held up year after year in soils with percents of zinc; all the science says its fixed persistently. The design makes it fixed persistently, and I???m confident from, again, the basic research side and the experience side that its the persistent remediation that we???ve been seeking for these many years. END From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 7 14:52:15 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:52:15 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Port Hope ON - pllasma torch gasification plant proposed Message-ID: Energy-from-waste facility on track Thu Aug 07, 2008 By Jeanne Beneteau PORT HOPE - A proposed energy-from-waste facility in Ward 2 Port Hope is on-track for an late-2008 groundbreaking, says the company president. Sunbay Energy Corporation President Jordan Oxley said the municipal and provincial approval process phase of the $85 to $110 million plasma gasification project is moving along. The company will host a public open house in September at its Walton Street office, said Mr. Oxley. ???Although there are no major milestones to announce at this time, we are still on target for our original timeline,??? he said. In April, Sunbay unveiled plans to build an energy-from-waste gasification power plant on a 23-acre site west of Wesleyville Road, south of Hwy. 401. Mr. Oxley explained his company has an option to purchase the land, which will fall into place once the approval process is complete and shovels hit the ground. The plant will take between 12 to 18 months to build and, at this point, Sunbay is working towards an early-2010 commercial operation start-up date, he said. The project will create an estimated 200 jobs during the construction phase and the plant will employ about 50 people when operational. Jobs categories will range from engineering, the skilled trades and labour to equipment operations, he said. The proposed gasification facility will employ a three-phase process that takes feedstock (municipal waste and tire waste); uses plasma gasification ??? at high temperatures, the process produces synthetic gas (syngas) which is then used to run turbines to produce electricity; and converts feedstock to a vitrified (glassy) material. When fully operational, the plant could handle approximately 400 tons of municipal solid and tire waste per day and produce enough syngas to power generation equipment to produce 26 megawatts of power, enough to provide electricity for up to 25,000 homes. The residual vitrified material can be used as road paving material or even molded into bricks or tiles, he added. The plant will complement, not replace, recycling and waste will be sorted to ensure recyclables are removed from the feedstock, said Mr. Oxley. The proposed Port Hope energy-from-waste gasification power plant is one of three the company plans to build in Canada, said Mr. Oxley. Sunbay officials are currently evaluating potential sites, including two more in Ontario, he noted For more information on the Sunbay Energy plan, visit www.sunbayenergy.com or drop into the company???s office at 35 Walton St. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 11 15:24:40 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:24:40 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> CDC progress report re: combatting antimicrobial resistance Message-ID: Antibiotic resistant diseases are killing more and more people. Increasingly people who are otherwise healthy are contracting antibiotic resistant infections outside a hospital setting - in the community. Here is an update ...to 2007 on projects, research studies, and surveillance for antibiotic resistant diseases. Since almost all hospital wastes are flushed to sewage treatment plants - what is the role of sewage, wastewater effluent, and sewage sludge in promoting and distributing antibiotic resistance in the environment? http://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/actionplan/2007_report/ann_rept.pdf From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 11 15:38:21 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:38:21 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Pembroke Mass - E.coli in tap water - state of emergency Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: This boil water advisory was issued when Ecoli was found in the drinking water. In Walkerton Ontario several people died from drinking water contaminated with E.coli O157. In Walkerton - the town habitually simply flushed the water lines when they found contamination - so they were very slow to issue a boil water advisory. The results were tragic. In Walkerton it was found that the water mains themselves were contaminated with bacterial films and that the pipes themselves were a source of contamination. All the water pipes in Walkerton Ontario had to be replaced, because the biofilms were so persistent that the pipes could not be cleaned. Pembroke Mass. needs to see if this is also the case. And they should check and see if sewage or sewage sludge runoff is infiltrating the water pipes. MASSACHUSETTS: Officials call 'state of emergency' over E. coli in tap water 10.aug.08 MyFox Boston http://www.myfoxboston.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7176104&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1 PEMBROKE, Mass. -- Officials in Pembroke have declared a state of emergency after E. coli was found in the town?s water system last week. Bottled water is set to be delivered to the town Sunday night and it will be available to residents on Monday. Residents can pick up the water from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Officials are urging residents to boil water and keep it boiling for one minute before letting it cool. Meanwhile,the public works department continues to flush out the system, and officials plan to search for the source of the bacteria on Monday. Aug 11, 2008 1:46 pm US/Eastern Origin Of E.Coli Narrowed Down To 2 Sources PEMBROKE (WBZ) ? Officials are getting closer to figuring out the source of the E.coli found in Pembroke's water supply. The problem has been narrowed down to one of the town's water towers and a water main, WBZ's Bill Shields has learned. Officials say routine bacteria samples taken last week tested positive for the bacteria. E.coli can cause illness, particularly among the very old, very young and those with weakened immune systems. Since learning about the contamination, officials have implemented a boil-water order for the entire town. Even if the source of the bacteria was found today, the boil water would remain in effect for at least a few more days. Officials believe the origin of the bacteria could be in the High Street Water Tower, or a water main that is fed from another part of town. Shields has learned the town may have divers search the water tower this afternoon. They believe someone may have climbed the tower and put something in it, or there could be a dead bird inside. On Saturday, bulletins were posted on public buildings, and officials used local cable access and the local radio stations to spread the word. On Friday night, officials used Plymouth County's communicator to send a reverse 911 advisory to the town's 5,600 households. A second call was sent out Saturday afternoon. The call instructed residents to avoid using tap water for drinking, cooking or brushing teeth unless it's been brought to a rolling boil for at least one minute. In the meantime, free bottled water is being handed out to residents at Pembroke High School. According to officials, the town spent $5,000 on bottled water. http://wbztv.com/local/pembroke.water.ecoli.2.792367.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 11 18:46:57 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:46:57 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> David Lewis : Ex-EPA scientist fights agency over sewage sludge Message-ID: Bob Brobst EPA: "We're a bunch of nerdy scientists. How the hell do we know how to cover up and do conspiracies? We're boring." Definition of 'nerd' : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerd Since when is social ineptitude a hallmark of integrity? .............................. Published on Saturday, August 09, 2008 Ex-EPA scientist fights agency over sewage sludge The Associated Press ATHENS, Ga. David Lewis is a lab rat with no lab, a researcher with no salary, a once-influential scientist whose only perk these days is a lonely cubbyhole. In his heyday, he was a high-ranking Environmental Protection Agency scientist whose discovery that dental equipment could be a haven for the HIV virus in the 1990s earned him prestige and respect. Now he's a pariah, working out of a spare office at the University of Georgia and waging a quixotic battle with his former patron over sewage sludge, the reason for his gradual fall from grace. More than a decade ago, Lewis began to challenge the EPA's policy allowing farmers to spread the semi-solid byproduct of wastewater treatment plants over their fields as a free, nutrient-rich fertilizer. He's investigated illnesses and deaths he claims are linked to the sludge; he said his work has helped prod government officials to issue guidelines for workers who handle the sludge. He's also filed a flurry of lawsuits, the latest in March 2006 claiming UGA was complicit in a scheme by EPA leaders to justify the agency's program that distributes sludge to farm fields. "Science is getting trumped by politics and I want that fixed," said Lewis. "My case is the worst case scenario where politics is blocking good science." There was more than a hint of a conspiratorial tone in his voice recently when he said he's up against "an effort organized by multiple federal agencies and powerful industry groups with support of tens of millions of dollars in congressional earmarks." The UGA and EPA researchers have stood by their work and deny wrongdoing. "There's no cover-up. There's no conspiracy," said Robert Brobst, an EPA environmental engineer and a defendant in the lawsuit. "We're a bunch of nerdy scientists. How the hell do we know how to cover up and do conspiracies? We're boring." For Lewis, who said he's trying to reclaim his reputation, it's been a costly crusade. He's lost his job with the EPA and was spurned by UGA, where he once hoped to land a gig as a tenured professor. But he has reason to be encouraged. A federal judge has refused to throw out Lewis' lawsuit against UGA, and his work is helping focus attention on sewage sludge beyond the small circle of scientists who now study it. "There really has not been adequate research about what this material is, let alone the repercussions," said Rob Hale, an environmental chemistry professor at the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences. "Folks were told that this stuff had been studied to death, and Lewis is concerned that they're overstating what they knew about the material." Wastewater treatment plants across the nation produce about 7 million tons of the sludge each year as a byproduct, and slightly more than half of it is used as fertilizer. The EPA has long argued the sludge is safe as long as it's applied properly. "If it's misused, if it's overapplied, if it doesn't meet quality criteria, of course it's going to be a problem," said Brobst, who has specialized in this area for 30 years. Still, "Based on what we know today, yes, it's safe," he said. "Science takes little steps, but if you add up all the little pieces in 1,500 articles in the last five years, you have a safe argument." Lewis, who was never shy to question EPA policies, turned his attention to sewage sludge in 1996 after the issue kept coming up during an informal poll of his colleagues. He started collecting samples from sewage treatment plants, using some of the same methods he used while investigating dental products: Collecting gunk and analyzing it for harmful pathogens and toxic materials. He soon found some that certain pathogens in the sludge could survive disinfection by taking shelter in fatty greases and oils. "It doesn't take but a high school education in science to understand this stuff: Bacteria hides in hunks of gunk," he said. He presented his findings at a national conference in 1998, prompting a new round of media coverage _ and more scrutiny from his employer. Other EPA researchers soon conducted a study that refuted some of his work, though Lewis has questioned their methodology. Lewis' growing reputation didn't do him any favors with his bosses, who offered in 1998 to pay his salary at UGA for four years as long as he retired after the contract was up. At UGA, though, he said he wasn't granted the freedom he had hoped, and started conducting research on his own dime. UGA never did offer him a job, and when his EPA contract was up, Lewis refused to retire and was let go in 2003. Since then, he's turned his full attention toward fighting his former employers in court, where he's had a few successes and some stinging defeats, such as a 2004 administrative judge ruling that said Lewis has not provided "scientific evidence to back up his belief" that the sludge could pose a significant danger to people. On the walls of Lewis' modest home in Watkinsville are some of the proudest images of his career, and in his office is a silver cabinet full of sludge files. To Lewis, they are a constant reminder of the score he still wants to settle. And to some of his colleagues, that's not such a far-fetched idea. "He's got a lot of guts and fortitude, and he's been right in the past," said Hale. "You need people like that, whether you agree with him or not." http://www.fayobserver.com/article_ap?id=127592 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 12 12:21:56 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:21:56 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Research: Soil Increases Infectiousness of Prions Message-ID: "Even after 29 months, in other words more than two years, we were still able to detect prions in the soil." But are these prions still infectious? "The soil actually seems to increase the infectiousness of the pathogens. The incubation period ? the time it takes for the disease to break out ? is exceedingly short even after the prions have persisted in the soil for 29 months GERMANY: Resistant prions 11.aug.08 Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft Dr. Bj?rn Seidel http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-08/f-rp081108.php A flock of sheep at pasture ? a seemingly idyllic scene. But appearances can be deceptive: If the animals are suffering from scrapie, entire flocks may perish. Scrapie is an infectious disease in which prions destroy the animal's brain, rather like BSE. The brain becomes porous, the sheep lose their orientation, they suffer from strong itching sensations and scrape off their fleece. Eventually, the infected animals die. It is difficult to contain the disease ? all too often, scrapie will break out again on the same farm several months or years after it has apparently been eradicated. Are the prions transmitted not only by direct contact, but also by the environment ? perhaps by the pastures? How long do prions that get into the pasture via the saliva and excrements of the sick animals, persist in the ground? Together with fellow-scientists from the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin and the Friedrich Loeffler Institute (Federal Research Institute for Animal Health) on the island of Riems, research scientists from the Fraunhofer Institute for Molecular Biology and Applied Ecology IME in Schmallenberg investigated these questions on behalf of the German Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety BMU. "We mixed soil samples with scrapie pathogens to find out how long the pathogens would survive," says Dr. Bj?rn Seidel, who headed the investigations at IME. "Even after 29 months, in other words more than two years, we were still able to detect prions in the soil." But are these prions still infectious? "The soil actually seems to increase the infectiousness of the pathogens. The incubation period ? the time it takes for the disease to break out ? is exceedingly short even after the prions have persisted in the soil for 29 months. All of the animals that were given contaminated soil became sick within a very short time. These results indicate that fresh incidences of scrapie among sheep are due to contaminated pastures," says Seidel in summary. The results of the study reveal that sheep may even become infected from the surface water, though the risk of infection is much lower in this case. There is no danger to humans, however: scrapie pathogens seem unable to affect them. Another cause for concern is chronic wasting disease (CWD). Like BSE and scrapie, this is caused by prions, but it mainly affects deer. The numbers of infected animals in North America are rising steeply. How long do BSE and CWD prions survive in the ground? "To find this out, we urgently need to carry out further tests. The appropriate research applications have already been submitted," says Seidel. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 12 12:30:17 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 12:30:17 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Ontario - why store sludge when you can do something better? Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: There is increasing awareness that the land application of sewage sludge not only degrades water quality and puts food at risk...but also that the costs associated with land application are spiralling as sludge hauling costs increase, farmers resist taking sludge, and farm practices restrict sites and application rates. So why spend $3,000,000 to build a sludge storage site in Trenton Ontario? Storing sludge means land applying sludge. Durham Region has Ministry of Environment approvals for a third fluidized bed for sludge but they won't build it yet...because they spent so much public money building the sludge storage that they figure they need to continue land application to justify the storage expense. Rural communities like Brock and Clarington are continuing to be dunned and hounded to take municipal sludge wastes on their farm fields because someone in planning built an expensive sludge storage site. There are better ways to handle sludge and better ways to spend public funds. ....................................................................................... http://www.trentonian.ca:80/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1153135 City may put biosolids project on hold Posted By Michelle McCarthy ? The Trentonian The $3 million on site biosolids storage project may be put on hold. It was approved in this year's municipal enterprise budget to build a $3 million on site biosolids storage facility at the Trenton waste water plant. ?When we started the design and engineering work for the project, because that area used to be a landfill site, we found there was a lot more garbage than we had originally envisioned,? said Chris Angelo, director of public works for Quinte West. "This drew the estimated costs from $3 million to $5 million.? Quinte West and Belleville were recently approached by Prince Edward County to partake in a study to review other options for biosolids rather than just looking at options for disposal and storage. ?We're preparing a report to take to the public works committee regarding taking part in the study,? said Angelo. He said they are looking at ways to make the project a cooperative effort between the three municipalities. ?It would be an advantage for all of us. We could all save costs if we can do it co-operatively ,? said Angelo. He said this study with help the city investigate other options. "The hope is to get the study started this year and we're willing to put storage facilities on hold because it could open up alternatives to our municipalities,? said Angelo. ?There are benefits to waiting and seeing what this study will come out with in terms of saving us costs.? Angelo added the city is just waiting to hear back from Belleville before moving forward. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 12 14:58:49 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:58:49 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Port Hope, Ont: Broken Pipeline releases uranium and arsenic into Lake Ontario Message-ID: SludgewatchAdmin: Port Hope also has has uranium contaminated sewage sludge, raked dry by summer students, sitting in storage for the past 15 years at the sewage treatment plant. ......................................... FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Port Hope Ward Two residents demand Cameco Corporation stop dumping uranium into lake PORT HOPE -- Cameco Corporation must be made to stop dumping treated water still contaminated with uranium and arsenic into Lake Ontario from the Welcome Waste Management Facility, says a group of Ward Two residents. The residents wrote Michael Binder, Ph.D, President and CEO of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission after receiving laboratory tests of water it found pouring out of a broken pipe on a public beach where Brand Creek empties into Lake Ontario. The tests, done by Caduceon Environmental Laboratories in Peterborough, showed the water was contaminated with uranium and arsenic well above both the Interim Provincial Water Quality Objectives and the Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines "but within the limits allowable by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Committee (CNSC)". The pipe carries treated water from the Welcome facility maintained by Cameco under licence number WNSL-W1-2339.0/indf., which was renewed for an indefinite period in 2002 by the CNSC. The license contains ?no limits? for the release of uranium into Lake Ontario, and it sets arsenic levels that are 100 times higher than Ontario?s water quality objectives. The Welcome site contains old soil with elevated levels of uranium, arsenic and radium. The pipe dates from 1957, but since 1978 there has been a system in place that is supposed to treat the collected groundwater prior to its discharge into the lake and whether they are illegal given the ?? current Ontario Water Quality Objectives". The broken pipe was noticed by a pilot flying low over Lake Ontario and he chose to contact a Lake Shore Road resident. The resident has reported the break to Cameco and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and asked those agencies to investigate the questionable discharges. Results of the tests paid for by local residents closely resemble Cameco?s own 2007 monitoring results from the Welcome pumping station, which are provided to the CNSC and the Municipality of Port Hope on a quarterly basis. The following table shows how those compare to federal and provincial water standards: Interim Provincial Water Quality Objectives Canadian Drinking Water Guidelines Limits in CNSC license WNSL-W1-2339.0/indf. Cameco monitoring July to September 2007 Resident water tests June-July 2008 (highest of 3) Arsenic .005 mg/L .01 mg/L .5 mg/L <.005-.027 .02 Uranium .005 mg/L .02 mg/L none .03-.28 .246 ?Something has gone wrong here,? said Sanford Haskill, who owns waterfront property west of the broken pipe. ?We are concerned that any toxic contamination is being allowed into the lake, but certainly it should not be happening just a few kilometers from Port Hope?s municipal water intake.? He said the broken pipe provided the first opportunity for outsiders to test the effluent from Welcome. The pipe was built in 1956. ?We hope the contamination indicates a very recent breakdown in the treatment system, and that Cameco quickly repairs it,? Haskill said. ?God help the lake if it?s been going on for 40 or 50 years.? Haskill said he is also concerned about Cameco?s lax scrutiny of its pipeline. ?Winter ice is the only force that could have uprooted that pipe and sliced it open, and that means it has been spewing uranium and arsenic onto the beach for four months. ?It shouldn?t be left up to an individual to detect leaks from Cameco, or to uncover the inadequacies of the CNSC?s licenses. In light of what?s happened in the last year, this company simply has to do a better job of eliminating its pollution of Lake Ontario. Canadians and Americans who take their water from the lake should be outraged. This has got to stop.? He said, he is also concerned that Cameco is not being forced to clean up the thousands of kilograms of uranium, arsenic and fluorides that have leaked into the ground underneath its UF6 plant. Some of it has reached the Lake, but the company says it doesn?t yet know how much. This month marks the first anniversary of the discovery of that leak, and the plant has been closed ever since. Contact: Sanford Haskill 905-885-8743. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 12 14:59:30 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:59:30 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Plan to turn waste sludge into electricity Message-ID: http://www.dailygazette.com:80/news/2008/aug/12/0812_methanesewer/ Council OKs methane project Plan is to turn waste sludge into electricity Tuesday, August 12, 2008 By Kathleen Moore (Contact) Gazette Reporter Veolia Water employee Jim Versocki shows one of the two digesters at the Schenectady Water Treatment Plant Monday. The digesters break down sludge, which produces methane gas. The hope is to use the methane gas to run generators and produce electricity. SCHENECTADY ? The city took the first step toward turning a smelly gas into clean electricity on Monday as the Schenectady City Council approved a $497,000 project for the sewage treatment plant. The money will go toward turning an unused piece of equipment into a ?gravity thickener,? in which liquid is drained out of the sewage sludge. A thicker sludge will produce more methane, which will be crucial to the next step in the process ? harnessing that methane to generate electricity for the plant. The power generation will save the city an estimated $282,000 a year in electricity costs, according to engineers. The city will also save $37,000 a year in materials purchased to thicken the sludge artificially. Councilman Mark Blanchfield pointed out that once the methane is harnessed, city residents won?t smell gas wafting out of the sewage treatment plant anymore. ?The project will allow us to not only capture the methane and generate electricity with it but to benefit the environment further by not releasing the methane,? he said. ?It?s a wonderful program, a win-win both environmentally and financially for the city.? The city plans to spend another $1.5 million to harness the methane. City officials plan to take out a $2 million bond for the full expense, which could be paid back in less than seven years if the city uses all of the money saved by the project. There?s still some time before the methane turns on the plant?s lights. The city hasn?t yet purchased the final component ? the engines that would use the methane to create electricity. Those engines generally arrive nine to 12 months after they are ordered, so the city will not see a reduction in utility costs until 2010. At that time, methane is expected to produce 30 percent of the city?s electricity, according to Commissioner of General Services Carl Olsen. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 14 15:00:56 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:00:56 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Union sues to try to stop Detroit Synagro sludge deal Message-ID: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 Union files suit to void Synagro sludge contract Paul Egan / The Detroit News DETROIT -- The union representing City of Detroit sewage plant workers filed a lawsuit against the city Wednesday, seeking to have a controversial multimillion-dollar contract with Synagro Technologies Inc. declared null and void. The FBI and a federal grand jury are investigating possible bribes in connection with the Detroit City Council's awarding of the Synagro contract last November, in a 5-4 vote. "We think this contract should be canceled," said George B. Washington, a Detroit attorney representing Local 207 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. "It was undertaken under what is, at minimum, extremely questionable circumstances and should be stopped." Synagro, based in Houston, Texas, has suspended its Michigan vice president, James Rosendall, and halted payments to Rayford W. Jackson, a Detroit businessman who was a local partner in the deal. Rosendall cooperated with the FBI in a sting operation involving payments to city officials and both Rosendall and Jackson had their phones tapped under federal court orders, persons familiar with the investigation said. Synagro has said it is a not a target of the investigation and is cooperating. In the lawsuit filed Wednesday in Wayne County Circuit Court, the union alleges the awarding of the no-bid contract to haul and treat the city's sewage sludge violated the City of Detroit Charter and a city privatization ordinance. A city official denied the allegations Wednesday. The charter, which sets out how the city should be governed, says that city water and sewer services should be provided by publicly controlled entities, the lawsuit alleges. "There have been widespread reports that federal law enforcement authorities have evidence that agents of Synagro had paid money to members of the City Council, their staff, City officials and others in return for their approval of the Synagro contract," the lawsuit alleges. "Upon information and belief, a federal grand jury is currently considering whether to indict one or more members of Council or others in connection with the Synagro contract. "If those reports are true, the city may therefore have subcontracted substantial public services and caused the loss of substantial numbers of public jobs by means which violate applicable local, state and federal law." Union president John Riehl, a plaintiff in the lawsuit who has said the Synagro contract could eliminate 140 jobs at the city sewage plant, said Wednesday he hopes federal investigators wrap up their case and bring charges quickly. Already, as a result of the Synagro contract, "our workers are losing overtime (and) they're not filling (vacant) positions," Riehl said at a news conference. Mary Sevakis, a spokeswoman for the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department, said a city study showed the contract complied with the charter and privatization ordinance and bribery allegations remain unproven. Sevakis said any affected employees will be retained, and, if necessary, retrained. Synagro, which has appealed to the Detroit City Council not to terminate the contract, had not yet seen the lawsuit and had no immediate comment, spokeswoman Darci McConnell of McConnell Communications said. Synagro is not named as a defendant in the suit. The union plans a rally and picket outside the Coleman A. Young Municipal Center at 4:30 p.m. Monday. It is calling on Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick to resign over his legal problems, which are not related to the Synagro contract. http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080813/METRO/808130477/1361 ................................................................. Union sues to try to stop Detroit sludge deal 8/13/2008, The Associated Press DETROIT (AP) ??? A union has filed a lawsuit to try to stop a contract between the city of Detroit and a Houston-based sludge handler. The lawsuit filed Wednesday says it's illegal for Detroit's water and sewage services to be handled by a private company. Local 207 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees fears a loss of jobs for its members. It also says the deal is tainted because of a federal investigation into possible bribes. Synagro Technologies Inc. has said it's not a target of the probe, but an employee who worked on the deal is cooperating with the FBI. Synagro spokeswoman Darci McConnell had no immediate comment on the lawsuit. http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/news-56/1218654251128280.xml&storylist=newsmichigan ___ ............................................................................. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 14 18:00:21 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:00:21 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Don't Use Sludge under Drought Conditions - toxic nitrates Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: The same researchers who explained in 2002 that using sludge under drought conditions can cause toxic levels of nitrates in crops - are now publishing research saying that sludge use makes crops drought resistant. The new research story promoting sludge for drought resistance, fails to mention that the sludge ammended crops might be toxic. ................................................... http://journalpress.com/print_this_story.asp?smenu=200&sdetail=5328 Biosolids help crops resist drought say Virginia Tech Researchers Dr. Xunzhong Zhang examines grass that is being studied as part of the Virginia Tech research on the ability of biosolids to help protect crops against drought. Blacksburg, Va.---For years farmers have reported that crops grown in biosolids amended soil appear to be more drought resistant than crops that don?t receive biosolids. Now researchers at Virginia Tech think they know why. Biosolids are the nutrient-rich organic materials resulting from the EPA-approved treatment of sewage sludge in municipal wastewater treatment plants. Biosolids are applied as fertilizer and soil conditioner to farmland and forests in Virginia and throughout the U.S. Improvements in soil structure from the organic matter that biosolids provide may account for some of this drought-resistance effect, but researchers at Virginia Tech led by Dr. Erik Ervin and Dr. Greg Evanylo of the Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences speculate that something else is going on. For the past few years, they?ve been investigating the effects of biosolids to enable crops to better withstand drought stress in greenhouse studies. Ervin and Evanylo believe that biosolids contain biologically active substances that enable crops to withstand environmental stress, including drought. The greenhouse offers a controlled environment in which it is easier to measure such stress responses. Detailed analysis of various types of biosolids has confirmed that they contain substances such as hormones, humic acids, vitamins, and amino acids that are important either as plant growth regulators themselves or as feedstock for microbes that can produce such plant biostimulants. The researchers also have confirmed that plants grown in biosolids-amended potting media contain higher levels of various plant growth regulators than plants grown in soil without biosolids. The concentrations of these substances are very small, in the range of several parts per million, but the researchers believe this is enough to make a significant impact. They have been able to show that some plants grown in the soil with biosolids were more tolerant of drought stress than the plants grown without biosolids. Now the researchers are ready to test their theory in the real world outside the greenhouse. They hope to soon launch a field trial in which they will grow corn with and without biosolids and try to document the effects of plant growth regulators. The work is not just of academic significance. If the researchers can document that a certain pathway leads from constituents in biosolids to the production of a particular plant growth regulator, the wastewater treatment plant managers that produce biosolids may be able to modify their processes to boost production. Farmers will benefit from such ?designer? biosolids by producing higher yielding and quality crops under environmental stress. These advantages may become even more important under the stresses produced by the continuing predicted climate change. ................................................................ Crop and Soil Environmental News, September 2002 Risk of Toxic Nitrate Accumulation in Forages Grown on Biosolids-amended Soils G.K. Evanylo, Professor and Extension Specialist Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences Nitrite toxicity to livestock consuming excessive concentrations of nitrates in forages has been well documented in the scientific literature. The following excerpt by Ball, et al. (1991) summarizes the knowledge on this topic. "Nitrate poisoning in livestock is primarily caused by the consumption of pasture or hay containing high concentrations of nitrate nitrogen (N). During periods of low soil moisture or low humidity, nitrates can accumulate in plants heavily fertilized with N. Hay cut during or just after a drought period is suspect, especially if N was applied just prior to hay harvest. Shading by other plant species, cloudy weather, and frost may also increase nitrate levels in plants. The application of N fertilizers during cool, wet, cloudy weather may also result in nitrate poisoning. Nitrates in hay are stable and can cause deaths months after harvest. Some forage plants are more likely to accumulate nitrates than others. Plants known to have considerable potential for accumulation of toxic levels of nitrates are sudangrass, sorghum-sudan hybrids, pearl millet, corn, wheat, and oats. Certain weeds may also accumulate toxic levels of nitrates and thus pose a threat, especially in hay. Examples are pigweed, smartweed, ragweed, lambsquarter, goldenrod, nightshades, bindweed, Canada thistle, and stinging nettle. In addition, the application of 2, 4-D herbicide can increase nitrate levels in plants. Plants containing more than 1.5% (15,000 ppm) nitrate are considered toxic to many classes of livestock. The reason for the toxicity is that nitrates are converted to nitrites in the digestive tract. Nitrites then oxidize the iron in the blood hemoglobin and prevent adequate oxygen transport. Animal symptoms are labored breathing, muscle tremors, and a staggering gait after which the animal collapses, gasps for breath and dies quickly. The membranes of the eyes and mouth are bluish, indicating a lack of oxygen. The blood is chocolate-brown but turns a brighter red when exposed to air. Animals grazing heavily N-fertilized pastures of suspect plant species during drought or wet pasture during cool, cloudy weather, should be carefully watched for symptoms. Prompt medication with a 4% solution of methylene blue supplied intravenously using 100 cc per 1,000 lb of body weight can prevent death. However, it is rare that the problem is diagnosed quickly enough to administer this treatment. Supplemental grain feeding can reduce risk through a dilution effect. Hay well-fertilized with N and produced during drought periods should be analyzed for nitrates in a laboratory. Hay containing up to 2,500 ppm nitrate (0.25%) is usually safe to feed. At concentrations of 2,500 to 5,000 ppm, several feeding cautions are suggested. Concentrations of 5,000 to 15,000 ppm are considered dangerous and require feeding restrictions. Concentrations > 15,000 ppm are considered toxic to most classes of livestock and should not be fed. The danger does not decrease with time. Toxic hay may be ground and mixed if the nitrate-containing hay is no more than 15% by weight of the ration. Animals can tolerate low levels of nitrates, but problems quickly develop when threshold levels in the blood are exceeded. Use of large round bales or stacks increases the danger of nitrate toxicity because the animals are likely to have the opportunity to consume more hay and thus get a larger total amount of nitrates into their bodies within a short period of time. Also, large bales and stacks may have concentrated spots of nitrates. When nitrate poisoning occurs, it often kills many large animals in a herd because a large group of animals often have the opportunity to gorge themselves on high nitrate forage." There are other disorders caused by toxic substances or mineral imbalances in forages and weeds consumed by livestock that may result in reduced productivity, visible symptoms of ill health, or even death. These include bloat (suffocation caused by consumption of certain legumes), prussic acid poisoning (suffocation caused by the production of toxic prussic acid or hydrocyanic acid formed from naturally occurring glycosides), and grass tetany (muscle spasms and convulsions resulting from low concentrations of Mg in the diet). All of these disorders are exacerbated by the same environmental conditions (i.e., drought; shady, cool, wet conditions) that increase the risk of nitrate toxicity. The symptoms and causes of death associated with bloat, nitrate toxicity and prussic acid are all due to oxygen deprivation. Several of the reports of nitrate toxicity have identified abortion as one of the symptoms observed. Nitrate toxicity has not been reported to be a prevalent risk in tall fescue pastures, where some of the symptoms have been reported; however, fescue toxicity, which is caused by a naturally-occurring endophyte fungus, does occur in fescue and is characterized by abortion of the fetus. It is important to understand that nitrate N is the main form of plant available N taken up by crops. Under optimum environmental conditions (i.e., full sun, adequate soil moisture), the nitrate form of the N is converted to protein in the plant. Environmental conditions that limit plant growth (i.e., drought, shade) limit the conversion of nitrate to protein and result in an accumulation of nitrate in the plant. This accumulation of nitrate is most prevalent where high rates of N fertilizer are applied. Any source of N can lead to excessive accumulation of nitrate. These can include commercial fertilizer, animal manure, biosolids, and green manure crops (e.g., decomposing clover or alfalfa). For this reason, nitrate testing of forages during drought is a commonly recommended practice, even where biosolids have not been applied. Biosolids use MAY pose a greater risk of nitrate toxicity than commercial fertilizer because: Biosolids are often applied to pastures and hayland at rates designed to supply an entire year of N, whereas commercial fertilizers are usually applied in incremental rates after each of the 3-4 cuttings or periodic grazings during the year; thus, there will likely be a larger amount of nitrate N available to the crop at the beginning of the growing season where biosolids are used. Recently established N mineralization rates for anaerobically digested biosolids are higher (30-35%) than the rates previously employed (20%) to calculate agronomic N rate. Using the old rate will result in a higher concentration of nitrate N in the soil during the initial growing season where anaerobically digested biosolids have been applied than required by the crop. The variability in the concentration of N in biosolids may result in higher than expected concentrations of nitrate in some fields (and lower in other fields). Based on the scenarios above, I have recommend that the Biosolids Use Regulatory Advisory Committee (BURAC), the Ad hoc advisory committee to the Virginia Department of Health, consider the following changes to nutrient management aspects of the biosolids regulations: 1) biosolids should be analyzed nearer to the time of application for N (and P) in order to ensure more accurate estimates of available N (and P), 2) the recently established (Gilmour, et al., 2000) first year mineralization rates for anaerobically digested biosolids of 30% for non-irrigated and 35% for irrigated sites should be adopted for Virginia, 3) biosolids should be applied based on nutrient management plans developed by Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation-certified nutrient management planners, and 4) biosolids application rates to forage crops that may be at risk for accumulating high concentrations of nitrate during deleterious climatic conditions should be re-evaluated. References Ball, D.M., C.S. Hoveland, and G.D. Lacefield. 1991. Southern Forages. Potash and Phosphate Inst., Atlanta, GA. 256 p. Gilmour, J.T., C.G. Cogger, L.W. Jacobs, S.A. Wilson, G.K. Evanylo, and D.M. Sullivan. 2000. Estimating plant-available nitrogen in biosolids. WERF Project 97-REM-3. 50 p. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Visit Virginia Cooperative Extension From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 14 18:04:17 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:04:17 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> San Bernardino County: Bill Postmus, meth addiction, sludge Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Bill Postmus is the former Supervisor for San Bernardino County who took $16,000 in campaign contributions from Nursery Products LLC...the sludge company that still wants to put a huge open air sewage sludge compost site near Hinkley California (yes, Erin Brokovich's Hinkley). Now Postmus is under investigation from a San Bernardino County Grand Jury and admits to a problem with methamphetamine addiction. .................................................... For more background on his associations with Nursery Products: http://www.achome.co.uk/theorganichome/blogs/gardening/2008/04/composting-and-law.html http://www.norman.locations.org/hinkley/locations/NEW/news%20stories/061210%20Hinkley%20LA%20times.pdf?locscout=b95fc8d0ab1a879120907b5eab6fe974 http://mailman.cloudnet.com/pipermail/compost/2006-December/014640.html http://list.web.net/archives/sludgewatch-l/2005-September/000835.html http://www.norman.locations.org/hinkley/locations/NEW/news%20stories/061005%20conaway%20let%202%20edi.pdf?locscout=8971496f829eba8967efd84712c9c5ba ............................................................ Two supervisors confirm Postmus??? rehab stint August 13, 2008 RYAN ORR Staff Writer SAN BERNARDINO ??? Two members of the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors said Wednesday that they were aware of a 2006 trip to a drug rehab facility by then-1st District Supervisor Bill Postmus. ???I was informed that he was going to get help for a problem with prescription drug pain killers,??? said 1st District Supervisor Brad Mitzelfelt. ???For several days the vice chairman (Paul Biane) was running the board, and I was running the 1st District office. There was no interruption in county service.??? Mitzelfelt, who served as Postmus??? chief of staff at the time, said he was on vacation in New York when he learned of the decision for Postmus to seek help. County Supervisors Chairman Paul Biane also confirmed he knew at the time about Postmus??? 2006 stint in a rehabilitation facility. ???Supervisor Biane considers Bill to be a longtime friend and longtime political ally,??? said Biane???s Spokesman Scott Vanhorne. ???He called on the assessor to respond or resign so he can focus on getting well if he truly is having a drug addiction problem.??? Despite a statement from Postmus alleging that Biane is launching a political campaign to destroy him, Vanhorne said, ???Ultimately Supervisor Biane wants Bill to get better.??? A second trip to rehab in March 2007 was reportedly to kick an addiction to methamphetamine, several sources close to Postmus confirmed. ???I was led to believe that he was cured and was never aware that he had any type of relapse,??? Mitzelfelt said. ???I never had any evidence or observation to believe otherwise.??? Fourth District Supervisor Gary Ovitt was not getting reliable information about where Postmus was during his absence in July 2006 and had no reason to believe he was in rehab, according to his Chief of Staff Mark Kirk. ???Like everyone else, we were privy to rumors,??? Kirk added. Third District Supervisor Dennis Hansberger also said he was unaware of Postmus??? whereabouts at the time. Hansberger said that a response to allegations of illegal drug use is warranted. Supervisors Paul Biane, Josie Gonzales and Brad Mitzelfelt have also asked for a response. ???All he has to say as to the allegation of illegal substance is ???I don???t do that,?????? Hansberger said. ???If not, he needs to say something that explains why he should not be viewed in a negative light because of the allegations.??? Postmus did not return a call and e-mail for comment. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 15 21:30:47 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:30:47 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Detroit: Union says: People must vote on Synagro Message-ID: http://www.michigancitizen.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=6379&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1070&hn=michigancitizen&he=.com The Michigan Citizen - 2669 Bagley - Detroit - MI - 48216 - (313)-963-8282 PEOPLE MUST VOTE ON SYNAGRO Lawsuit: Charter mandates voters decide Carlyle/Synagro By Diane Bukowski The Michigan Citizen DETROIT ? The City Charter requires that the people of Detroit must vote to approve any private franchise for water and sewerage services. Local 207 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) filed a lawsuit Aug. 13 which makes that contention and demands that the city rescind its contract with Carlyle/Synagro. The lawsuit, filed in Wayne County Circuit Court, also alleges that the no-bid contract violates the city?s privatization ordinance and may have been obtained through illegal means such as bribery of city officials. ?If we win, we will protect 140 jobs at the Wastewater Treatment Plant directly connected to the processing of wastewater sludge,? said Local 207 President John Riehl. ?We will keep the work of these essential services in-house, as 95 percent of our workers are Detroiters. City workers are the backbones of their neighborhoods and Detroit?s core institutions are an important part of our city?s future.? The major media has alleged that there is an ongoing FBI investigation and grand jury probe of city council members and their staff, along with community leaders, regarding the possible acceptance of bribes in connection with the contract. However, no official of Synagro or its parent company, the $83 billion Carlyle Group, is under scrutiny according to those reports. In fact, former Synagro executive James Rosendall allegedly wore a wire for the FBI to entrap a council staff member accepting a pay-off. The lawsuit says the city is trying to bypass its own Privatization Ordinance by claiming that the $225 million, 25-year contract with Carlyle/Synagro to dispose of sludge and build a thermal processing facility is nothing more than an amendment to a 1999 contract with Minergy, Detroit, LLC which was never enacted. It was not until Feb. 2008 that Synagro Detroit, LLC, a subsidiary of the Houston-based Synagro Technologies, filed an amendment to Minergy Detroit, LLC?s certificate of authority to operate in Michigan. The Detroit City Council approved the Carlyle/Synagro contract in Nov. 2007. ?As a result of that vote, since on or about April 14, 2008, Synagro Inc. has hauled 230 dry tons of biosolids per day from the City?s waste water treatment plant,? says the lawsuit. The lawsuit asks the court to declare the contract null and void, and award all lost wages and benefits to members of Local 207, as well as any other ?just and equitable? relief. It also asks the court to prohibit Synagro?s design, construction and operation of the thermal processing facility ?until and unless the federal investigation into the alleged bribery is completed.? ?The expenditure of such funds ? at a time when the city is in another budget crisis ? would make a mockery of the citizens? right to fair and honest government,? the lawsuit adds. Spokespersons for Synagro, the Mayor?s office, and Detroit?s water department said they had not seen the suit yet and could not comment on pending litigation. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 15 21:55:04 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 21:55:04 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Washington DC: handling pathogenic sludges with bare hands Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Chris Peot- biosolids manager District of Columbia - is fingering Class B sludge .... again. Why doesn't he follow the occupational health and safety requirements and wear gloves? Mr Peot says he touches sludge with his bare hands to convince the public that sludge is 'innocuous'. Why doesn't he obey the sanitation regulations that say what he does is a labour violation? Here are NIOSH and CDC websites advising that Mr Peot should be wearing gloves, and maybe a face mask, boots, goggles, coveralls, and possibly a respirator. What Mr Peot does is a misrepresention of the occupational health and safety requirements for sludge workers. Al Rubin, retired EPA Biosolids Coordinator, and consultant to Nursery Products LLC in California, now tells the public that sewage sludge is safe to eat. ....................................................... Personal Protective Equipment: Appropriate personal protective equipment should be required for all job duties likely to result in exposure to Class B biosolids. The choices of personal protective equipment include goggles, splash-proof face shields, respirators, liquid-repellant coveralls, and gloves. Face shields (that fit over the employee's hard hat) should be made available for all jobs where there is a potential for exposure to spray, high-pressure sewage leaks, or aerosolized biosolids during land application. Gloves should be used when touching biosolids or surfaces exposed to biosolids. Management and employee representatives should work together to determine which job duties are likely to result in this type of exposure and which type of equipment is needed. A qualified health and safety professional should provide training or retraining in the appropriate use of personal protective equipment. http://www.cdc.gov/NIOSH/docs/2002-149/2002-149.html http://members.aol.com/ruraleye/niosh/hid10.pdf ................................................................................. Campbell County?s ?sludge spread? KIM RAFF/THE NEWS & ADVANCE Russell Daniel spreads Nutri-Blend, a biosolid, on G.D. Gilliam?s property on Thursday. Gilliam is the first Campbell County farmer to spread biosolids on his fields. Some in the county have been fighting for more than a year to keep the material away. By Sarah Watson Published: August 14, 2008 GLADYS ? Just after 9 a.m., Chris Peot walked over to a steaming pile of biosolids, grabbed a chunk with his bare hands and broke it apart to show the material?s intimate details. ?I?m doing this just to show how innocuous this stuff is,? said Peot, biosolids director for the Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment plant in Washington, D.C. Up close, the treated sewage sludge is fibrous, almost like blackened paper pulp. A few steps back, it looks like freshly exposed clay. From afar, it?s like a pile of mud that changes color and releases steam when exposed to the air. Peot?s biosolids were applied for the first time to a Campbell County field Thursday. The spreading on the county?s only permitted field comes more than a year and a half after a bitter controversy erupted between Campbell citizens, farmers and officials. The debate, which triggered a citizen proposal to ban corporations from spreading treated sewage sludge fertilizer on county farmland, ultimately resulted in a testing and monitoring ordinance in line with state standards. On Thursday, 14 trucks each carrying about 25 tons of biosolids fresh from the Blue Plains plant dropped their loads. About the same amount will arrive today, Monday and Tuesday, Nutri-Blend Inc. spokesperson Mary Powell said. The material will treat about 134 acres of Gladys pastureland owned by G.D. Gilliam. The inaugural application drew an unusually large crowd of officials from various agencies, including the Virginia Department of Health, Department of Environmental Quality and Campbell County. The idea was for those in attendance to answer any questions from concerned citizens, Powell said. ?I thought today went pretty smooth,? said Campbell County environmental manager Brian Stokes. ?I didn?t see any issues.? Contrary to popular belief, the material is not spread in a solid thick layer, Peot said. Chunks are flung from a manure box spreader, which leaves a smattering of small black blobs on dry browned grass. Instead of the anticipated sulfur-based sewage stench, the pile was ammonia-scented ? get too close and the smell would bite as if one had been mopping the floor in a closed room. But just a few steps away, any odor was undetectable unless the light wind changed direction. That odor is the result of the treatment process, Peot said. Not all biosolids are treated the same way and some wastewater plants produce sludge that has a very different odor profile, Peot said. In January 2007, more than 400 concerned citizens overflowed the Rustburg Haberer Building to protest Nutri-Blend?s proposed permit modification to increase the amount of permitted land in the county to almost 3,000 acres. Most were concerned that the sludge could contain toxins and harm the environment. Testing standards based on federal requirements examine a small amount of potential toxins, namely certain heavy metals that are easily detectable. Many organic compounds are only tested for on a quarterly basis, Peot said. He wants to increase that to once a month at the Blue Plains plant, but that hasn?t occurred. Since the DEQ took over regulatory oversight in January from VDH, the proposed permit modification is all but dead because Nutri-Blend must apply for a new permit, Campbell County administrator David Laurrell told the Board of Supervisors in July. Biosolids is the name for the solid remains from the wastewater treatment process. Once the suspended solids, including human waste and paper, have been isolated, it?s then treated with lime to kill 95 percent of pathogens and allow the material to decompose. The result is a slow-releasing nutrient fertilizer that?s free for farmers, Powell said. Only about 6 percent of the sewage coming into the Blue Plains plant is industrial, including the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, which contributes ink and some heavy metal waste in permitted levels, Peot said. But the volume coming into the plant ? enough to fill R.F.K. Stadium each day ? dilutes any pollutant to negligible levels, Peot said. New regulations implemented just before the DEQ switchover require nutrient management plans, a process usually reserved for other organic fertilizers such as poultry litter and manure. That plan, which Powell usually compiles, details exactly how much of the material is needed for the soil conditions and permitted crops. The D.C. Water and Sewer Authority, which operates Blue Plains, contracts with an independent environmental consulting firm to monitor the material from its creation to when it?s spread on fields. Maryland Environmental Service operations manager Ed Taylor said part of his work is to monitor the material?s odor and quality. ?We have the authority that if it doesn?t meet our standards, to send it back to Blue Plains or to a landfill,? Taylor said. Peot added, ?for a large program, it?s extremely unusual to have a presence in the field every day.? http://www.newsadvance.com/lna/news/local/article/campbell_countys_sludge_spread/7434/ From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 16 01:48:59 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 01:48:59 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Warren OHIO - sludge leaking into the Mahoning River Message-ID: Warren Facing Possible Fines Over Leaking Sludge The Ohio EPA has the city of Warren under the gun, ordering it to stop sludge from leaking into the Mahoning River. The source of the leak is the Nature's Blend operation.. which turns human waste into fertilizer. If the city doesn't act quickly enough.. it faces fines of up to 60-thousand dollars a day. http://www.wfmj.com/Global/story.asp?S=8849655 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 16 14:33:38 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:33:38 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Green Project in BC burns biomass, treats sewage in backyard Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Many of you will already know that Victoria BC has no sewage treatment. Here is a neighbourhood development using on site technologies to create a green sustainable living environment. Hats off to Dockside Green. .................................. Green Project in B.C. Burns Sawdust, Treats Sewage in Backyard Review by James S. Russell Aug. 15 (Bloomberg) -- If you think energy efficiency can't do much to beat high fuel prices and tackle global warming, consider a 15-acre neighborhood under construction in Victoria, British Columbia. Your view will include a heating plant fed by waste wood chips, and water from a sewage treatment plant trickles gently outside the back door. Dockside Green is no architectural hair shirt. Residents do indeed gaze upon a stream partly fed by the outfall of a tiny, on-site sewage-treatment plant. Yet the water is almost clean enough to drink. It burbles among rocks, driftwood and native vegetation between town houses with private planted terraces and apartment buildings that rise as high as 10 stories. Runoff from roofs and driveways also feeds the stream, which tumbles through reed-planted basins among stairs and walks. A long-legged egret may drop by for breakfast. The woodland stream is the centerpiece of what will become a 26-building, 1.3-million-square-foot (120,000-square-meter) mix of apartments, restaurants, stores and offices at completion, perhaps six years from now. Victoria-based Windmill Development and Vancity, a local Canadian credit union, have rescued a close- in, industrial site near the edge of the Inner Harbor in this picturesque city of blue ocean inlets and fir-covered ridges on Vancouver Island. On a recent visit, builders were assembling a biomass gasification plant about the size of a tractor trailer. It will accelerate the decomposition of wood waste, creating gas that is burned for low-cost, soot-free heat and hot water. Value Creation Few developers are interested in treating sewage and burning lumber leftovers, though Windmill's co-chairman, Joe Van Belleghem, sees what's called ``natural capitalism'' as ``a new lens for creating value.'' He offered to pay the city of Victoria $1 million if the project doesn't achieve a platinum award (the highest) from the Canada Green Building Council's LEED rating system. ``That got everyone's attention,'' Van Belleghem said by telephone. The 108,000-square-foot first phase scored higher than any other development rated by LEED. While politicians and lobbyists debate massive, years-long investments to increase North American energy supplies, Dockside Green dramatically cuts energy use now. Conservation and efficiency have generally been treated condescendingly in the U.S. energy debate, like the bright but annoying student whose hand always shoots up first. Experts argue about what truly constitutes ``carbon neutral,'' though Dockside Green certainly comes close without using unproven technologies or promising to plant trees in Brazil. The development avoids the self-conscious display of its eco-tactics. If anything, it's too blandly, reassuringly pleasant. Natural Breezes Vancouver architecture firm Busby Perkins & Will has calibrated the depth of apartment balconies to shade the units from excess sun, augmented by sensor-driven awnings that unfurl automatically. The rooms are arranged so that most ventilate naturally -- a necessary feature in the days before air conditioning yet now largely a lost art. The care taken in the building's configuration means air conditioning isn't needed. The biomass boiler supplies a radiant heating system in the floor and hot water for bathing and washing. With these and other measures, bills for heating and hot water -- among a homeowner's largest expenses -- are almost eliminated, along with the greenhouse gases that would be generated by conventional heating. Residents also save because the development puts almost nothing into the city's sewage stream. That means a great deal to cities hitting their sewage-treatment limit just as floods worsen. Buses, Ferries Dockside Green also shows how community design can reduce reliance on cars. The close-in location links residents to four bus lines, a tiny passenger ferry that chugs to various locations around the bay, and the Galloping Goose bike path, which is fast becoming a commuting artery, not just a road for weekend excursions. A car-sharing service may permit some families to sell one of their vehicles. A recent analysis of similar communities designed to reduce auto use suggested that a one-third reduction in miles driven is achievable. That's huge compared with the gains that will come from the 35-miles-per-gallon U.S. ``fleet average'' mandated by Congress for 2020. According to Van Belleghem, one family moved from a suburb to Dockside Green because they wanted to trade long commutes and house maintenance for a short bike commute that allows more time at home with children. I think of this when people tell me we cannot cut America's energy profligacy because it will require radical lifestyle changes and politically unpalatable sacrifice. Dockside Green's appeal suggests that we need an attitude change: Let's start thinking about how to make lemonade (a shorter commute) out of lemons (higher gas prices). (James S. Russell is Bloomberg's U.S. architecture critic. The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this story: James S. Russell in New York at jamesrussell at earthlink.net. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aDfWMU2ByinI&refer=muse From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 16 14:37:56 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:37:56 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Prion Infected Meat-and-Bone Meal Is Still Infectious after Biodiesel Production Message-ID: Prion Infected Meat-and-Bone Meal Is Still Infectious after Biodiesel Production Cathrin E. Bruederle1*, Robert M. Hnasko1, Thomas Kraemer2, Rafael A. Garcia3, Michael J. Haas3, William N. Marmer3, John Mark Carter1 1 USDA-ARS WRRC, Foodborne Contaminants Research Unit, Albany, California, United States of America2 Forensic Toxicology, Institute of Legal Medicine, Saarland University, Homburg/Saar, Germany3 USDA-ARS ERRC, Fats, Oils and Animal Coproducts Research Unit, Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania, United States of America Abstract The epidemic of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) has led to a world-wide drop in the market for beef by-products, such as Meat-and-Bone Meal (MBM), a fat-containing but mainly proteinaceaous product traditionally used as an animal feed supplement. While normal rendering is insufficient, the production of biodiesel from MBM has been suggested to destroy infectivity from transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). In addition to producing fuel, this method simultaneously generates a nutritious solid residue. In our study we produced biodiesel from MBM under defined conditions using a modified form of alkaline methanolysis. We evaluated the presence of prion in the three resulting phases of the biodiesel reaction (Biodiesel, Glycerol and Solid Residue) in vitro and in vivo. Analysis of the reaction products from 263K scrapie infected MBM led to no detectable immunoreactivity by Western Blot. Importantly, and in contrast to the biochemical results the solid MBM residue from the reaction retained infectivity when tested in an animal bioassay. Histochemical analysis of hamster brains inoculated with the solid residue showed typical spongiform degeneration and vacuolation. Re-inoculation of these brains into a new cohort of hamsters led to onset of clinical scrapie symptoms within 75 days, suggesting that the specific infectivity of the prion protein was not changed during the biodiesel process. The biodiesel reaction cannot be considered a viable prion decontamination method for MBM, although we observed increased survival time of hamsters and reduced infectivity greater than 6 log orders in the solid MBM residue. Furthermore, results from our study compare for the first time prion detection by Western Blot versus an infectivity bioassay for analysis of biodiesel reaction products. We could show that biochemical analysis alone is insufficient for detection of prion infectivity after a biodiesel process. Citation: Bruederle CE, Hnasko RM, Kraemer T, Garcia RA, Haas MJ, et al. (2008) Prion Infected Meat-and-Bone Meal Is Still Infectious after Biodiesel Production. PLoS ONE 3(8): e2969. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002969 Editor: Neil Mabbott, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom Received: April 21, 2008; Accepted: July 24, 2008; Published: August 13, 2008 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Public Domain declaration which stipulates that, once placed in the public domain, this work may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. Funding: CRIS 5325-32000-007-00D and CRIS 5325-32000-008-00D Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. * E-mail: cathrin.bruederle at gmail.com From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 20 19:00:33 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 19:00:33 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Resource Recovery from Sludge - good things from sludge Message-ID: This page is courtesy of Stephen Salter of British Columbia http://www.georgiastrait.org/files/share/PDF/Resource_Recovery_Examples_2008.pdf From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 21 14:56:20 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 14:56:20 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Milorganite- volumes down - too toxic and too little plant nutrient Message-ID: Brookfield sludge could help Milwaukee sewage program By LISA SINK lsink at journalsentinel.com Aug. 17, 2008 In a region in which government cooperation proves challenging, common ground is being found over an unlikely commodity: sewage sludge. A regional treatment plant in Brookfield has offered to stop hauling its sludge west, where it is spread on Jefferson County farm fields, and truck it instead to Milwaukee?s Jones Island plant. The facility needs nitrogen-rich sludge to boost its production of Milorganite after the city?s loss of wet industries. The pilot program won?t cost the Brookfield plant more money and may help put more of the popular fertilizer on store shelves and golf courses nationwide. ?If I can do something at no additional cost and give the (Milwaukee) treatment plant additional options for how to dispose of that sludge, we should do it,? Brookfield Public Works Director Tom Grisa said. A Brookfield Common Council committee endorsed the plan last week. If approved by the full council, the pilot program would run Aug. 25 to Dec. 31. A Milwaukee sewage official praised Grisa and the city for embracing the idea. He cautioned that it was premature to say whether the collaboration would do much to increase Milorganite production or its nitrogen content. ?We don?t know how our processes are going to react to this,? said Peter Topczewski, water quality protection manager for the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewage District. ?We?re going to start off slow. We don?t want to upset our plant, either.? Still, Topczewski said, if the test is successful, it may be a cost-effective, environmentally friendly way for other area sewage plants to dispose of sludge rather then burning it or burying it in landfills. Milwaukee?s production of dried sewage sludge fertilizer has suffered for decades from the loss of breweries, tanneries and other industries, most recently from the shutdown of the Red Star Yeast plant. Unable to guarantee 6% nitrogen levels in its fertilizer year-round, the sewerage district sells bags with 5% and 6% levels. Annual Milorganite production ? which peaked in the 1960s and ?70s at about 71,000 tons ? dropped to about 43,175 tons in 2005 and 33,566 tons in 2006. Last year, a chemical contamination at Jones Island forced the district to stop making fertilizer for about four months, which cut 2007 production to 27,693 tons. Net revenue was about $4.3 million last year, down from about $5.2 million in 2006 and about $5.8 million in 2005, according to district figures. Sales don?t cover the cost to make Milorganite, but creating fertilizer is cheaper than other ways to dispose of the sludge, which is a byproduct of sewage treatment. Sludge is not fecal matter or industrial waste; it?s a mass of billions of corpses of microscopic bugs that eat sewage. Brookfield Mayor Jeff Speaker said he hoped the pilot program would build bridges for other partnerships. Brookfield and Elm Grove are seeking to purchase Lake Michigan water from Milwaukee?s water utility. ?We are finding common ground,? Speaker said. ?And that?s how you build up trust and how you move forward. ?We want to make sure that everybody gets everything that they need and we build the region as strong as we can.? Grisa said the Fox River Water Pollution Control Center plant in Brookfield pays about $170,000 a year, or 3.3 cents a gallon, to haul its sludge to Jefferson County and apply it to farm fields as crop schedules permit in spring and fall. Brookfield?s contractor, Veolia, which in March began operating MMSD?s sewage plants and Milorganite production, said it would charge the same rate to travel daily to dump sludge at Jones Island. The Brookfield plant, which treats sewage piped from about a half-dozen Waukesha County communities, trucks about 4.5 million gallons of sludge a year. The 1 million to 2 million gallons it would send to Jones Island through Dec. 31 likely would be a drop in MMSD?s bucket of sludge, perhaps increasing it 3% to 4%, Topczewski said. But it could help replace some of the loss from industries, and Brookfield?s sludge has tested high in nitrogen, he said. MMSD also has talked with Janesville officials about getting their sludge. He said MMSD, however, likely would charge Brookfield and Janesville in any long-term arrangement a rate to offset Milwaukee?s sales-adjusted costs to convert the shipped sludge to fertilizer. Grisa said that rate would have to be negotiated and acceptable for the pilot program to be worth continuing. Steve Jacquart, MMSD?s intergovernmental coordinator, said the proposed sludge pilot program is one of many examples in which local governments have pooled resources to better handle waste or monitor watersheds. ?We?re always trying to find cost-effective ways to partner with area municipalities to deal with all kinds of environmental issues,? he said. http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=784269 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 22 02:44:46 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 02:44:46 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge Victims - Tell Your Story to Barbara Boxer before Sept 11 Message-ID: Go to: http://www.sludgenews.org/ If you need help writing up your sludge experience, contact Laura Orlando (below) or Nancy Holt at Fg325 at aol.com or Maureen Reilly at maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Congressional Investigations Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works The Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer, announced that EPW will have hearings on the disposal of sewage sludge on agricultural and other land. These hearings will be held on September 11, 2008, in Washington, D.C. As more information becomes available about the hearing, we will post it here. The hearings are usually live streamed on the web. Check the EPW website the day of the hearing. Confirmation of the day and time are usually posted a few days beforehand on the EPW website. Dear Friends, The new date for the EPW hearing on sewage sludge will be September 11, 2008. Please note, the date could still change, but this is likely it. I will send an email to you when I get confirmation. You can also check with Sludge News at http://www.sludgenews.org For up to date information. Go to http://www.sludgenews.org/investigations/ Please help us collect testimony and sludge stories. Let people know about Sludge News and ask them to post their stories/testimony at http://www.sludgenews.org/action/ Thanks. Laura -- Laura Orlando Executive Director, RILES Adjunct Professor, Boston University School of Public Health (BUSPH) 179 Boylston Street, 4th floor Boston, MA 02130 Tel 617-524-7258 Fax 617-522-0690 Email: orlando at riles.org From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 24 15:01:21 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:01:21 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Canada - Maple Leaf Foods cold cuts confirmed listeria- 5 dead and dozens ill Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: For years sludged residents and environmental advocates have been begging Maple Leaf Foods to stop putting their wastewater sludges on farmlands....to no avail. For more on Listeria and sludge: http://list.web.net/archives/sludgewatch-l/2006-December/002043.html ........................................................... BARFBLOG: Maple Leaf cold-cuts confirmed as listeria source in Canada: at least 5 dead, dozens ill 23.aug.08 barfblog Doug Powell http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/listeria-1/maple-leaf-coldcuts-confirmed-as-listeria-source-in-canada-at-least-5-dead-dozens-ill/index.html Canwest News Service is first out of the block, citing a senior government official as saying Saturday that testing has confirmed that an outbreak of listeriosis that has claimed at least four lives ??? and probably several more -- across Canada has now been positively linked to processed meats produced at Maple Leaf Consumer Foods. http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=222b628d-8dc8-46af-b1dd-540864db14b8 Earlier Saturday, the Public Health Agency of Canada upped to 21 the number of cases of a deadly listeriosis outbreak that have been confirmed so far in four provinces. The agency said in a statement that 16 of the cases were found in Ontario, three in British Columbia, and one each in Saskatchewan and in Quebec. Three deaths in Ontario - St. Catharines, Hamilton and Waterloo - have been officially tied to the deadly strain of the food-borne listeria bacterium, and a fourth death on Vancouver Island has also been attributed to the strain. http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/tmp-pmv/2008/listeria080820-eng.php The public health agency also said a further 30 suspected cases remain under investigation. Of those, 14 are in Ontario, eight are in Quebec, four are in Alberta and two each are in B.C. and Saskatchewan. So, with the positive ID, will Canadian politicians and bureaucrats keep smugly bragging about their wonderful system for foodborne disease surveillance? http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/08/articles/listeria-1/death-toll-from-listeria-in-canada-climbs/ It???s impossible to tell from the various public statements who became sick when, and whether the system really worked or not. If you???re going to brag about how the system is working, you have to provide dates for onset of illness and deaths. Those dates have not been provided. Take a look at the updates from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control concerning the Salmonella Saintpaul outbreak and compare that with what comes out of various Canadian agencies. There is no comparison. http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/saintpaul/ Tell the public what you know, what you don???t know, and what you???re doing to find out more. http://barfblog.foodsafety.ksu.edu/2008/07/articles/food-safety-communication/canadian-food-inspection-agency-can-communicate-about-risk-at-least-when-evans-is-involved/ top TORONTO: Deadly listeriosis outbreak traced to Maple Leaf meats 23.aug.08 Canwest News Service Nicole Baer http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=222b628d-8dc8-46af-b1dd-540864db14b8 OTTAWA -- Testing has confirmed that an outbreak of listeriosis that has claimed at least four lives (probably several more ??? dp) across Canada has now been positively linked to processed meats produced at Maple Leaf Consumer Foods, a senior government official said Saturday. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Public Health Agency of Canada have been testing samples of recalled meat for the past week to determine the source of a fatal outbreak of listeriosis. They were to make details public later Saturday evening. Earlier Saturday, the Public Health Agency of Canada upped to 21 the number of cases of a deadly listeriosis outbreak that have been confirmed so far in four provinces. The agency said in a statement that 16 of the cases were found in Ontario, three in British Columbia, and one each in Saskatchewan and in Quebec. Three deaths in Ontario - St. Catharines, Hamilton and Waterloo - have been officially tied to the deadly strain of the food-borne listeria bacterium, and a fourth death on Vancouver Island has also been attributed to the strain. The public health agency also said a further 30 suspected cases remain under investigation. Of those, 14 are in Ontario, eight are in Quebec, four are in Alberta and two each are in B.C. and Saskatchewan. "These cases are positive for listeriosis, but genetic fingerprinting results are required before they can be determined to be linked to the outbreak strain," the agency said in a statement. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 24 16:32:52 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:32:52 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Wall Street Journal : What's Coming From Your Tap? Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: If you read this on the link below you will be able to see the table describing different kinds of in-home water treatment devices. .......................................... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121910526011851511.html?mod=googlenews_wsj What's Coming >From Your Tap? By ANJALI ATHAVALEY August 19, 2008; Page D1 America's latest drinking problem isn't about alcohol. Concerned about the cost of bottled water -- and its environmental consequences -- many people are turning back to tap water to quench their thirst. But as evidence mounts of contaminants in public systems, unease about the water supply is growing. Engineers say that U.S. water quality is among the world's best and is regulated by some of the most stringent standards. But as detection technology improves, utilities are finding more contaminants in water systems. Earlier this year, media reports of trace amounts of pharmaceuticals in water across the country drew attention from U.S. senators and environmental groups, who are now pushing for regulation of these substances in water systems. Getty Images Of particular concern, experts say, are endocrine-disrupting compounds -- found in birth-control pills, mood-stabilizers and other drugs -- which are linked to birth defects in wildlife. Also alarming are antibiotics, which if present in water systems, even in small amounts, could contribute to the rise of drug-resistant strains of bacteria, or so-called super bugs. Many pharmaceuticals taken by humans are excreted into urine, or are flushed intentionally down the toilet. Even though wastewater is treated, trace amounts of the drugs are often not eliminated. Also, drugs found in the waste of animals treated with hormones and antibiotics can eventually end up in groundwater. The actual health effects of drugs in water systems are unclear. The levels that have been detected are relatively small compared with those of other regulated contaminants, such as mercury and benzene. A 2008 study funded by the Denver-based Awwa Research Foundation -- a nonprofit research group that was established by the American Water Works Association -- concluded that it is "highly unlikely" that pharmaceuticals will pose a threat to human health. (But the pharmaceuticals are having a dramatic impact on aquatic life, and perhaps soil and sediment microbes as well. Antibiotic resistance is a huge concern - Admin) But many medical experts argue that more studies need to be done -- and note that the amount of drugs in the water matters less than who drinks it. Some drugs, even in small amounts, can be especially harmful to infants, pregnant women or those with chronic health conditions, for example. The publicity has frightened many consumers. Laura Pfeil, 39, a stay-at-home mother with four sons in Mason, Ohio, says it does concern her, "especially when thinking of my children's welfare." She says she started using bottled water at home 15 years ago when she was pregnant with her eldest son because she thought it was safer than tap water. Three years ago, though, her family switched to a PUR Water Filter System, made by Procter & Gamble Co., to save money and to reduce the waste resulting from plastic bottles. (Environmentalists also point to the energy wasted in transporting bottled water.) Now, says Ms. Pfeil, she has concerns about consuming trace amounts of pharmaceuticals that the filter may not eliminate. A spokeswoman for P&G's PUR division says it "cannot confirm the reduction of pharmaceuticals in water with carbon filters." Sales of PUR filters are at an all-time high, says the spokeswoman, an indication of tap water's new popularity. U.S. consumers spent $16.8 billion on bottled water in 2007, up 12% from the year before, according to Beverage Digest, a trade publication. But growth has slowed over the last three years. Drugs are only one category of contaminants found in tap water. A 2005 study released by the nonprofit Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based research group, found that tap water in 42 states is contaminated with more than 140 unregulated chemicals, including MTBE, perchlorate and industrial solvents. Protesting a Disinfectant Even chemicals used to clean and disinfect drinking water are causing worry. Citizens' groups in states such as California, New York and Vermont are protesting the increasing use of chloramine -- a combination of chlorine and ammonia -- to disinfect drinking water. Utilities are using chloramine because of Environmental Protection Agency limits on chlorine byproducts. Citizens Concerned About Chloramine in the San Francisco Bay Area, an activist group, says that hundreds of residents have had reactions, such as rashes and respiratory problems, to the disinfectant. Some byproducts of chloramine can be more toxic than chlorine byproducts, says Michael Plewa, a professor of genetics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign who has studied disinfection byproducts. The EPA says chloramine is safe in drinking water and has been used for decades. In the absence of federal regulation of certain chemicals in water systems, some states have stepped in. California, for one, has set standards for various compounds that are not regulated by the EPA, including perchlorate, an ingredient used in rocket fuel that was spilled into groundwater during the Cold War and has been found in many water systems. Massachusetts has set standards for perchlorate and requires that water utilities in the state test for MTBE, a gasoline additive. "What you see in many states is a reaction to the lack of action at the federal level," says Suzanne Condon, director of the Bureau of Environmental Health at the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Tap Versus Bottled Health concerns extend to bottled water, says Sarah Janssen, a science fellow at the Natural Resources Defense Council, or NRDC, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group based in New York. "A lot of bottled water is actually tap water, so there is no assurance that what is coming from the bottle is any safer than what is coming from the tap," she says. In fact, experts say tap water is held to more stringent standards by the EPA, and tested more often, than bottled water, which is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Utilities are required by law to send annual reports to their customers detailing contaminants found in water systems and whether they exceed levels set by the EPA. They are not required to list unregulated contaminants in these reports. If a contaminant exceeds the EPA's "maximum contaminant level," the report should detail the potential health effects of the contaminant and a summary of actions the utility is taking. If you do notice a contaminant that exceeds EPA levels in your utility's report, consider installing a tap-water filter, experts say. Water that is tested by utilities is generally tested at the plant. It still has to travel through your pipes to get to your tap, so if you have pipes that are a couple of decades old, it may be a good idea to get the water from your tap tested in a lab -- especially if you are pregnant, nursing or have small children, says the NRDC's Dr. Janssen. People who get their water from private wells should have their water tested annually. Water filters aren't foolproof. Those that are certified by NSF International -- a nonprofit group that tests food and water products -- can get rid of unwanted chemicals to EPA's standards, but consumers should be aware that trace amounts of chemicals may still be left in their water. Carbon filters, which come in the form of a faucet mount or a pitcher, are the most commonly used and cost about $30, says Rick Andrew, operations manager of the drinking water treatment unit program at NSF. These can be fairly effective in removing many contaminants, but need to be replaced about every two months. Other options -- such as reverse-osmosis systems, which use a semipermeable membrane to remove contaminants, or ultraviolet light treatment, which prevents micro-organisms from reproducing -- can be more effective, but they cost hundreds or even thousands of dollars. Some consumers have found the cost is worth it, especially if members of the family have certain health conditions. Last April, Elizabeth Beyer, 47, purchased a Kinetico Inc. K5 Drinking Water Station for her father, who had a liver transplant in February. Doctors had advised him to drink only filtered water. The system, which cost $2,100, is meant to remove contaminants ranging from lead to chlorine sediment using reverse-osmosis technology and two additional filters. Ms. Beyer, who lives in Venice, Fla., says it was worth it. Her water is clearer and crisper. "I can definitely taste the difference," she says. "You can see the difference." Write to Anjali Athavaley at anjali.athavaley at wsj.com Corrections & Amplifications Bottled water is held to different standards than tap water, but not necessarily less-stringent ones. The Environmental Protection Agency sets standards for contaminants in public water systems, while bottled water is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. In addition, states often set their own standards, which may be stricter than federal rules. This article incorrectly said tap water is held to more-stringent standards than bottled water. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 24 16:41:38 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:41:38 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> PCBs still in use - can be flushed to sewers and found in sludge Message-ID: Thanks to Helane Sheilds for this: "Between 2002 and 2005, two large electrical transformers located on Platform Hondo, part of Exxon?s Santa Ynez Unit, leaked nearly 400 gallons of PCB-contaminated fluid. Exxon allowed one of the transformers to leak for almost two years before repairing it. The leaking from the transformers constitutes illegal disposal of PCBs, a violation of the Toxic Substances Control Act. Additionally, Exxon failed to ensure that workers who cleaned up the leaked fluid were provided protective clothing or equipment to protect against direct contact with and inhalation of PCBs. Exxon replaced the two transformers with non-PCB containing transformers in 2005." " . . .and many PCB-containing materials are still in use today." If PCBs are still in use in 2008, then there are pathways for discharge into public sewers . . . because proper hazardous waste disposal is VERY costly . . . . . . . ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; http://totalrecallinfo.blogspot.com:80/2008/08/us-epa-fines-exxon-mobil-264-million.html Friday, August 22, 2008 U.S. EPA fines Exxon Mobil $2.64 million for PCB release U.S. EPA fines Exxon Mobil $2.64 million for PCB release Contact Information: Francisco Arcaute, (213) 798-1404, arcaute.francisco at epa.gov Toxic chemical leaked at the facility off the coast of Santa Barbara County LOS ANGELES ? The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has settled with the Exxon Mobil Corporation for $2.64 million for allegedly disposing of and improperly handling polychlorinated biphenyls (?PCBs?) on an offshore oil and gas platform in the Santa Barbara Channel, off the Southern California coast, in violation of the federal Toxic Substances Control Act. ?Today?s settlement sends a clear signal that companies must follow PCB regulations to protect communities and our environmental resources,? said Wayne Nastri, administrator for the EPA?s Pacific Southwest region. ?The EPA will not hesitate to take enforcement actions against companies that fail to properly handle and dispose of PCBs.? Between 2002 and 2005, two large electrical transformers located on Platform Hondo, part of Exxon?s Santa Ynez Unit, leaked nearly 400 gallons of PCB-contaminated fluid. Exxon allowed one of the transformers to leak for almost two years before repairing it. The leaking from the transformers constitutes illegal disposal of PCBs, a violation of the Toxic Substances Control Act. Additionally, Exxon failed to ensure that workers who cleaned up the leaked fluid were provided protective clothing or equipment to protect against direct contact with and inhalation of PCBs. Exxon replaced the two transformers with non-PCB containing transformers in 2005. PCBs are man-made organic chemicals used in paints, industrial equipment, plastics, and cooling oil for electrical transformers. More than 1.5 billion pounds of PCBs were manufactured in the United States before the EPA banned the production of this chemical class in 1978, and many PCB-containing materials are still in use today. When released into the environment, PCBs remain for decades. Tests have shown that PCBs cause cancer in animals and are suspected carcinogens in humans. Acute PCB exposure can also adversely affect the nervous, immune, and endocrine systems as well as liver function. Concerns about human health and the extensive presence and lengthy persistence of PCBs in the environment led Congress to enact the Toxic Substances Control Act in 1976. For more information on PCB regulation and enforcement, as well as the Toxic Substances Control Act enforcement in general, please visit the EPA?s website at: www.epa.gov/region09/toxic/pcb/ www.epa.gov/compliance/civil/tsca/index.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 24 14:21:14 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 14:21:14 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> US: NRDC lawsuit - pesticide clothianidin link to bee colony collapse disorder Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: This chemical has been banned in Germany - due to the link to bee die offs. One of the dangers of sludge use is the impact of the chemicals in the sludges on bees. I have received several calls from people who have seen bees enraged when the hives are located in or near sludged fields. The bees swarm around the heads of nearby residents, and die off in any standing water troughs or ponds. I have seen this happening. Bee keepers had to come in and relocate the hives. Someone should do some research on sludge and bees. Another risk from sludge is the presence of pesticide residues in sludges...both from industrial wastewater from pesticide manufacturing, runoff from pesticide spread properties, and pesticides in landfill leachate that is introduced into sewage treatment plants. ............................. US: NRDC alleges pesticide clothianidin linked to colony collapse disorder in beehives, sues Feds, Mysterious honey bee disorder buzzes into court 23.aug.08 Environmental News Service http://beestreesfrogselephants.blogspot.com/2008/08/nrdc-alleges-pesticide-clothianidin.html WASHINGTON, DC. -- The nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council filed a lawsuit Monday in federal court in Washington DC to force the federal government to disclose studies on the effect of a new pesticide on honey bees. Studies on the pesticide, clothianidin, were ordered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from the pesticide's manufacturer, Bayer CropScience, in 2003 when the federal agency granted the company a registration for the chemical. An NRDC bee researcher and the organization's attorneys believe that the EPA has evidence of connections between pesticides and the mysterious honey bee die-offs reported across the country called "colony collapse disorder," or CCD, that it has not made public. The connection is important because commercial honey bees pollinate about 90 of the country's crops, valued at $15 billion. Apples, peaches, pears, pumpkins, squash, cucumbers, cherries, berries, peppers, squash, soybeans, almonds, cashews, and sunflowers all require or benefit from honey bee pollination. The EPA has failed to respond to the NRDC's Freedom of Information Act request for agency records concerning the toxicity of pesticides to bees, prompting Monday's legal action. "Recently approved pesticides have been implicated in massive bee die-offs and are the focus of increasing scientific scrutiny," said NRDC attorney Aaron Colangelo. "EPA should be evaluating the risks to bees before approving new pesticides, but now refuses to tell the public what it knows." "Pesticide restrictions might be at the heart of the solution to this growing crisis, so why hide the information they should be using to make those decisions?" Calangelo asked. At an apiary by the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania, bees fill the air as beekeepers examine hives for disease. (Photo courtesy Penn State) The EPA has issued a fact sheet on clothianidin, one of a relatively new class of insecticides known as neonicotinoids that impact the central nervous system of insects. Full article on ENS-Newswire.com: Natural Resources Defense Council sues government over pesticide link to CCD From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 25 16:05:38 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:05:38 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> American Alternative Energy Systems Corp - Gasifier for Renewable Energy Message-ID: American Alternative Energy Systems Corp. Announces Waste to Energy Rights Acquisition Proven Gasifier Technology Converts Most Difficult Waste Streams Into Local Renewable Energy Last update: 12:09 p.m. EDT Aug. 25, 2008 DENTON, TX, Aug 25, 2008 (MARKET WIRE via COMTEX) (PINKSHEETS: AATV) -- American Alternative Energy Systems Energy Corporporation company president Jeff Kulman announced today that the Company has reached an agreement in principle with Waste to Energy (Canada) Gasification Systems Inc. of Toronto, Ontario to obtain the distribution rights to the patented Waste to Energy ("WTE") downdraft gasifier technology for the Americas. The system was developed in the mid 90s in the UK, and was originally designed to produce energy from sewage sludge and other toxic organic wastes. Please feel free to visit www.waste-to-energy.co.uk for more details regarding this technology. Recently the technology has been significantly upgraded so that it can process virtually any type of municipal solid waste stream, plus commercial and industrial wastes. The WTE system is modular, with the biggest module capable of processing up to one dry tonne per hour of waste. This makes it ideal for processing small local waste streams, and in particular sewage sludge that has already been "digested" to remove most of the volatile organic materials. The WTE gasifier can convert sewage sludge, especially combined with other dry wastes such as municipal solid waste streams, to produce efficient engineered fuels for local power and steam production. Dr. Wayne Maddever, Chief Executive Officer of Waste to Energy (Canada) Limited, said, "This is an exciting time in the renewable energy business, and we feel fortunate to have teamed up with a visionary company in American Alternative Energy Systems that understands the huge potential of our gasifier to revolutionize the waste to energy sector." Dr. Maddever added, "The WTE technology represents a significant breakthrough in the way we will destroy troublesome waste streams while producing local renewable energy. The focus of the waste to energy sector has evolved over the past few years away from incineration with waste heat recovery towards very efficient, low-emission gasification systems that produce a combustible gas, rather than simply burning the material to generate heat to produce steam." Dr. Maddever emphasized, "This relatively low BTU 'syngas' works extremely well with the new breed of specialized combined heat and power ('CHP') systems and maximizes the overall usage of the stored energy in the waste, while minimizing the huge volumes of NOx (nitrous oxides) produced by incineration of waste streams with free-flowing air." As a result, Dr. Maddever contemplates a huge market for these small, modular systems, which can be multiplexed to service all but the largest waste processing facilities. "We at WTE Canada see an opportunity to provide a clean, inexpensive way of converting the most difficult and noxious waste streams into the maximum possible amount of energy, with no impact on the environment except a positive one." www.aaenergysystems.com About American Alternative Energy Systems Corp. American Alternative Energy Systems Corp. (AAESC) is a company focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making a more sustainable environment through renewable energy. There are three different types of renewable energy in the market: wind, solar, and biomass. Of the three, biomass is the most economical and can solve other issues, making it a superior energy source. AAESC will produce Anaerobic Digesters that will turn manure and other bio-waste into electricity and heat. The digester will solve the farmers' manure disposal problems, and will produce electricity, heat, and income for the farm (the excess electricity will be sold to the hydro grid). AAESC's goal is to become Canada's market leader in digesters. It plans to become the leader by offering farmers the digester at no cost, simplifying the purchase process. Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements in this release that are forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, or other factors which may cause actual results, performance, or achievements of the company to be materially different from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially because of factors such as the effect of general economic and market conditions, entry into markets with vigorous competition, market acceptance of new products and services, continued acceptance of existing products and services, technological shifts, and delays in product development and related product release schedules, any of which may cause revenues and income to fall short of anticipated levels. All information in this release is as of the date of this release. The company undertakes no duty to update any forward-looking statement to conform the statement to actual results or changes in the company's expectations. Contact: Jeffrey Kulman President American Alternative Energy Systems Corp www.aaenergysystems.com 940-634-1912 http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/american-alternative-energy-systems-corp/story.aspx?guid=%7BA3AE6B31-396A-4D43-85BD-10BA7C8AE93A%7D&dist=hppr From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 25 16:35:18 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:35:18 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> NIH Paper on Integrating Human Health into Env Impact Assessments Message-ID: http://www.ehponline.org/members/2008/11132/11132.pdf National Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesENVIRONMENTALHEALTHPERSPECTIVESENVIRONMENTALHEALTHPERSPECTIVESehponline.orgIntegrating Human Health into Environmental Impact Assessment: An Unrealized Opportunity forEnvironmental Health and JusticeRajiv Bhatia and Aaron Wernhamdoi:10.1289/ehp.11132 (available at http://dx.doi.org/)Online 16 April 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2 Integrating Human Health into Environmental Impact Assessment: An Unrealized Opportunity for Environmental Health and Justice Rajiv Bhatia1, Aaron Wernham21San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, CA, 94102 rajiv.bhatia at sfdph.org2Alaska Inter-Tribal Council, Fairbanks, AK 99709 Corresponding Author: Rajiv Bhatia, San Francisco Department of Public Health, 1390 Market Street, Suite #822, San Francisco, CA, 94102 415-252-3931 (tel), 415-252-3818 (fax), rajiv.bhatia at sfdph.org (email) 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 3 Running Head: Integrating Health in EIA Article Type: Review Article Descriptor: Environmental Justice Key Words: Environmental Health; Environmental Impact Assessment; Environmental Justice; Health Determinants; Health Disparities; Health impact Assessment; Public Policy; Social Justice Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge the San Francisco Department of Public Health, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council, and the Columbia University Center on Medicine as a Profession for their support of this work.. Dinah Bear, Esq. provided valuable advice, support, and insight in preparing this manuscript. Tom Rivard contributed the map of modeled of roadway particulate matter concentrations in the manuscript. Dr. Bhatia did not receive funding support for writing this review. However, Dr. Bhatia conducted the analysis described in the review's case examples as an employee of the San Francisco Department of Public Health, a public institution. Neither Dr. Bhatia nor the San Francisco Department of Public Health has any financial interest in the publication or its outcomes. Dr. Wernham received funding for writing this review as a Fellow of the Columbia University Center on Medicine as a Profession. Dr. Wernham conducted the analysis described in the review's case examples as a consultant for the non-profit agency, the Alaska Inter-Tribal Council. Neither Dr. Wernham, nor Columbia University, nor the AITC have any financial interest in the publication or its outcomes. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 4 Abbreviations AITC Alaska Inter-Tribal Council BLM Bureau of Land Management CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CEQACalifornia Environmental Quality Act EAEnvironmental Assessment EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EIREnvironmental Impact Report EISEnvironmental Impact Statement FLPMAFederal Lands Policy and Management Act HIA Health Impact Assessment HIP Human Impact Partners MMSMaterials Management Service NEPANational Environmental Policy Act SFDCP San Francisco Department of City Planning SFDPH San Francisco Department of Public Health UCBHIG UC Berkeley Health Impact Group 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 5 Outline IntroductionEIA Statutes: Policy, Process, And Stakeholder Participation Health In EIA Regulations And Practice Health Impact Assessment: A Potential Catalyst For Integrating Health In EIA Integrated HIA/EIA: Examples From PracticeSan Francisco, California: Health Effects Of Urban Rezoning Alaska???s North Slope: Tribes Demand An Integrated HIA/EIS Lessons Learned EIA Requirements Support A Broad Consideration Of Health Effects Integrating Health In EIA Can Impact Public Policy Collaboration Is Essential For Successful Integration Predictive Judgments in HIA, as EIA, Require Appropriate Standards of EvidencePractitioners Need Analytic Tools For HIA A Cooperative Inter-Disciplinary Practice Can Evolve Conclusion: A Vision And Recommendations For Integrated Practice List of References Table 1 Figure 1 Legend Figure 1 4 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 6 AbstractObjectives The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and related state laws require many publicagencies to analyze and disclose potentially significant environmental effects of agency actions, including effects on human health. This paper reviews the purpose and procedures of EIA, existing regulatory requirements for health effects analysis, and potential, barriers, and opportunities for improving integration of human health concerns within the EIA process. Data Sources The review utilizes statutes, regulations, guidelines, court opinions, and empirical research on EIA, along with recent case examples of integrated HIA/EIA at both the state and federal level. Data Synthesis The review extracts lessons and recommendations for integrated HIA/EIA practice from both existing practices as well as the case studies. Conclusions The case studies demonstrate the adequacy, scope and power of existing statutory requirements for health analysis within EIA. The following support the success of integrated HIA/EIA: a proponent recognizing EIA as an available regulatory strategy for public health; the openness of the agency conducting the EIA; involvement of public health institutions; and complimentary objectives among community stakeholders and health practitioners. This review recommends greater collaboration among institutions responsible for EIA, public health institutions and affected stakeholders along with guidance, resources, and training for integrated HIA/EIA practice. 5 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 7 IntroductionA major achievement of the emerging environmental movement in the United States, theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) established a foundation for environmental policyin the U.S. This far-reaching legislation required that any ???major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment??? must undergo an evaluation and public disclosure of its environmental effects (NEPA 1969). To accomplish this mandate, NEPA institutionalized the now-ubiquitous environmental impact statement (EIS). For almost four decades, NEPA has been a powerful and influential tool for environmental protection (CEQ 1997a). At least 19 states or territories have now enacted statutes requiring someform of environmental impact assessment (EIA). NEPA applies to a striking range of activity, including, for example, highways and other transit projects and programs, natural resource leasing and extraction, industrial farming and policies governing genetically modified crops, and large-scale urban redevelopment projects. Every executive branch federal agency utilizes the NEPA process; over 500 federal programs undergo an EIS annually, and thousands more are evaluated using a similar but less detailed process termed ???environmental assessment??? (EA). State statutes such as the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) capture a still wider range of activity, often includingsmaller-scale development projects, as well as state programs for natural resources managementand public infrastructure development.Projects, policies, and programs subject to EIA influence not only environmental quality but also industry and employment patterns, regional economies, the built environment, social organization, and culture ??? important determinants of health and well-being. Viewed collectively, the range of activity subject to state or federal EIA exerts a profound influence on health in communities across the U.S. The protection of human health and welfare figures prominently in NEPA???s objectives, and regulations (NEPA 1969; CEQ 1978). In practice, however, the consideration of health within EIA is both rare and narrowly focused on toxic exposures; a comprehensive and systematic approach to 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 8 human health impacts in EIA practice has not evolved (Davies and Sadler 1997; National Research Council 2003; Steinemann 2000). The inattention to health in EIA practice stands in contrast to the interdependence among environmental change, societal conditions, and human health. Environmental change ??? including issues as diverse as global warming, deforestation, fisheries loss, and suburban sprawl ??? is now seen as a priority challenge to public health. The World Health Organization, for example, recently estimated that over 25% of the burden of human illness worldwide can be attributed to modifiable environmental conditions (Frumkin 2004; Pruss-Ustun and Corvalan 2006); and evidence linking social conditions such as employment, transportation, housing, food resources, social hierarchy, economic disparity, and social capital to health outcomes continues to grow in strength and depth (Marmot and Wilkinson 2006). In 1986, the Ottawa Charter on Health Promotion urged policy-makers in all sectors to ???beaware of the health consequences of their decisions and to accept their responsibilities for health??? (WHO 1986). It is increasingly clear that effective health strategies in the 21st century will require the involvement of all public sectors, and attention to the diverse social, economic, and environmental forces that shape community health (Hanna and Coussens 2001).This paper draws on the experience of public health practitioners in two settings to demonstrate that the statutory and procedural requirements of EIA provide a powerful and underutilized mechanism to institutionalize a holistic, cross-sectoral approach to addressing health in public policy. The paper reviews EIA requirements under two laws, NEPA and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and considers why health has not become a central focus of modern EIA practice. The paper then discusses the emerging practice of health impact assessment (HIA) as a catalyst for integrating health considerations into EIA practice, and describes early U.S. examples of integrated HIA/EIA. Finally, the paper discusses lessons learned from the authors??? experiences and steps towards a more active role for public health in shaping the policies and decisions made using EIA.7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 9 EIA Statutes: Policy, Process, and Stakeholder ParticipationIn contrast to laws that promulgate specific regulatory standards, such as the Clean Air Act, NEPA established EIA based on the premise that a full, public accounting of the potentialenvironmental effects of public decisions would promote environmentally responsible public policy and regulatory decisions (Karkkainen 2002). The EIA is intended as an informational document thatallows the public and decision makers to understand the potential impacts of a proposal. While specific requirements and terminology vary somewhat depending on the governing statute, most EIA statutes share the same basic requirements for a comprehensive assessment of potential environmental effects and for public participation. In this paper, we focus on the requirements of NEPA and CEQA to illustrate general features common to most EIA statutes. Both NEPA and CEQA are triggered when an agency decision is likely to impact the physical environment, either directly or indirectly. Under both laws, a less detailed, screening-level assessment may be used to determine the need for and scope of a full EIA (CCR ??15063; CEQ 1978 ??1508.9). Both statutes require that the EIA contain: a description of the environment affected by the proposed action; an assessment of the direct and indirect environmental impacts effects of the proposed action; and an analysis of reasonable alternatives to the proposed action, generally including a ???no-action alternative??? and various iterations of the proposed activity (Yost 2003). The development and analysis of alternatives is intended to provide options that maximize benefits while minimizing potential harms. Both statutes also encourage agencies to identify, consider and adopt specific mitigation measures, if available, to minimize any impacts identified. Finally, in cases where the adverse impacts of the proposed action appear too great, an agency may select the ???no-action alternative,??? or deny approval for the proposal. Under NEPA, the agency must adopt an enforceable Record of Decision (ROD) which specifies what activities will be permitted, what mitigation measures required, and how the EIA informed these decisions (CEQ 1978 ??1505.2.) Under CEQA, if the EIA identifies significant 8 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 10 environmental impacts, the lead agency must adopt findings identifying the required mitigations incorporated into the project. Certification of an EIA with unmitigated significant environmental impacts requires a formal Statement of Overriding Considerations that documents the project???s compelling benefits and the specific economic, legal, social or technological barriers that make mitigations or alternatives infeasible. NEPA and CEQA both also have strong provisions for public input, with mandates for publiccomment periods during which stakeholders ??? including impacted communities, public agencies, and project proponents ??? may submit input on the scope and adequacy of the EIA analysis. Both add force to public input by requiring that agencies respond to all substantive comments, accounting for the input either by modifying the EIA or by justifying the original analysis. NEPA also mandates the responsible, or ???lead,??? agency to solicit participation by state, local, and tribal governments and agencies with legal jurisdiction or relevant expertise (CEQ 1978 ?? 4331(a), ??4332(2)). According to the White House Council of Environmental Quality (CEQ ??? the bodycreated by NEPA to oversee its implementation): ???The benefits of enhanced cooperating agency participation in the preparation of NEPA analyses include: disclosing relevant information early in the analytical process; applying available technical expertise and staff support; avoiding duplication with other federal, state, tribal and local procedures; and establishing a mechanism for addressing intergovernmental issues??? (Connaughton 2002). Federal agencies with legal jurisdiction must be cooperating agencies (CEQ 1978 ??1501.6). Cooperating agency status allows an agency, community, or Tribe considerable opportunity to influence an EIA by participating in developing the scope, analytic approach, and selection of alternatives, as well as by drafting sections of the EIA itself. Despite over three decades of practice, some criticize the process of EIA as a bureaucratic hurdle that creates costly and duplicative information requirements, unnecessary procedural delays, and opportunities for special interest litigation (Black 2004; Karkkainen 2002). Despite these criticisms, however, there is considerable evidence that EIA statutes contribute to environmental 9 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 11 protection, and offer a process through which impacted communities can ensure that regulatory decisions are responsive to their concerns (Canter 1997; CEQ 1997a). Furthermore, EIA also offers avenues for a legal remedy if stakeholders are not satisfied that the process addresses their substantive concerns. The findings of an EIA and, at times, the associated public outcry can also influence ultimate decisions regarding the fate of the project (Douglas et al. 2005). A survey of NEPA scholars and practitioners conducted 25 years after its enactment found both strengths and room for improvement (Canter 1997). Responses suggested that NEPA???s important strengths include encouraging agencies to identify, study, and acknowledge potential environmental consequences, and to consider these consequences in their management decisions. At the same time, the survey revealed deficiencies, including the need for monitoring of impacts and mitigation efficacy; for methodological approaches to cumulative impact assessment; for earlier consideration of environmental impacts in the planning process; and for a more integrated consideration of biophysical and social impacts. Health in U.S. EIA Regulations and Practice NEPA explicitly recognizes the interdependence of environmental quality and human health.One of the stated purposes of NEPA is, "to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man" (NEPA 1969 ??4321). NEPA charged the Federal government "to use all practicable means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy" to "assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings" (NEPA 1969 ??4331). The regulations for implementing NEPA define the ???human environment??? as ???the natural and physical environment and the relationship of people with that environment??? (CEQ 1978 ??1508.14). The regulations define ???effects??? subject to analysis as those that are ??????ecological, aesthetic, historic, cultural, economic, social, or health, whether direct, indirect, or cumulative,??? (CEQ 1978 10 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 12 ??1508.8). Furthermore, in determining whether an effect is ???significant,??? an agency must evaluate the ??????degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety??? (CEQ 1978 ??1508.27). The term ???human environment??? expressed the intent of Congress for NEPA to promote public policy attentive to the interrelated needs of human well-being and environmental integrity. Senator Henry Jackson (1969), the key author of NEPA, expressed this clearly: "When we speak of the environment, basically, we are talking about the relationship between man and these physical and biological and social forces that impact upon him. A public policy for the environment basically is not a public policy for those things out there. It is a policy for people.??? Executive Order 12898, rooted in the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution, provides a more recent impetus for health effects analysis in EIA, requiring that ???each Federal agency make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high adverse human health and environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low income populations??? (Clinton1994). The CEQ guidance on implementing E.O. 12898 directs federal agencies to consider ??????ecological, cultural, human health, economic, or social impacts on minority communities, low-income communities, or Indian tribes when those impacts are interrelated to impacts on the natural or physical environment??? (CEQ 1997b). In an example of the use of this guidance, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission denied the license for a nuclear fuel enrichment facility near two small predominantly-minority rural communities because the project would have eliminated a road between the two communities (Bass 1998). Surprisingly little case law has considered requirements for health analysis within EIA under NEPA, perhaps because of the limited health analysis actually conducted within NEPA, and because plaintiffs in NEPA litigation have most commonly represented ecological concerns. MetropolitanEdison Co v. People against Nuclear Energy (PANE) (1983), a case in the Supreme Court, addressed impacts on psychological well-being under NEPA (Bauser 1985; Cole 2004). The Court ruled thatadverse psychological effects resulting from the perception of risk associated with nuclear power 11 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 13 generation were not cognizable under NEPA, because the ???risk of a risk??? was too distal a causal connection. This ruling has been the subject of considerable debate (see, for example, Bauser 1985and Jordan 1984). In writing the Court???s opinion, however, Chief Justice Rehnquist noted that ???all parties agree that effects on human health can be cognizable under NEPA, and that human health may include psychological health.??? The authors, along with the former General Counsel to the CEQ, believe that the PANE decision spoke primarily to the length of the causal chain as opposed to the place of psychological impacts under NEPA (Dinah Bear, Esq, personal communication by email, 2/21/2008).State-level versions of NEPA vary; however, of the 17 state NEPA-like statutes referenced on the NEPA website (http://www.nepa.gov/nepa/regs/states/states.cfm), 14 contain language that might support the inclusion of health. In California, CEQA requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) whenever the environmental effects of a project have the potential to cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly (CEQA 2005; CCR ??15065). CEQA regulations also specifically require that an EIR discuss ???health and safety problems caused by the physical changes??? (CCR ??15126.2).In California under CEQA, case law has provided more explicit support for health analysis inEIA. In Bakersfield Citizens v. City of Bakersfield (2004), the Court found an EIR inadequate because of its failure to analyze the respiratory health impacts caused by projects??? impacts on air quality. In the Court???s opinion, ???After reading the EIRs, the public would have no idea of the health consequences that result when more pollutants are added to a non-attainment basin.??? In another case, the Court found a California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) EIR deficient because it did not adequately evaluate the health impacts of authorizing pesticide use, including impacts on people in non-agricultural areas (Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. CDFA 2005). Surprisingly, despite the intent and requirements of EIA statues, in practice EIA has not developed a systematic and comprehensive approach to health, either in the U.S. or internationally (Arquiaga 1994; Cole 2004; Davies and Sadler 1997; Steinemann 2000; Wernham 2007). One12 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 14 review of 42 Federal EIAs conducted under NEPA found that more than half contained no mention of health; a minority contained narrow discussions of health risks (usually cancer risk assessments) associated with chemicals or radiation (Steinemann 2000). Commonly, conformity with existing applicable environmental regulations such as the Clean Air Act serves as a proxy for a project???s health and safety performance, and EIA rarely extends to consider health impacts mediated via changes in the built environment, social determinants, or economic impacts (Davies and Sadler 1997;).Institutional, organizational, and disciplinary factors all help explain the inattention to health within EIA (Rattle and Kwiatkowski 2003). EIA practice evolved primarily in agencies with mandates for environmental management and protection. Currently, neither responsible agencies nor publichealth officials generally view EIA as an avenue to address health objectives (Noble and Bronson 2006). Assumptions about the appropriate scope of EIA naturally derive from the regulatory mandates of the agencies undertaking EIA and, with time, have become entrenched as precedents (CDOT 1997; Cole 2004). Thus, currently, EIA is largely accomplished by agency staff or by private consultants who lack health expertise. Regulatory agencies rarely request input from health agencies and there is no established mechanism or expectation for such interaction. In addition, U.S. EIA statutes do not explicitly describe the kinds of public health effects to be included in an EIA, and to date there is no guidance that specifies the appropriate scope, standards, or methods for analyzing health effects. In the absence of such guidance, the specific health-related requirements of environmental regulatory acts such as the Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) often define the scope of health concerns within EIA. The rigid boundaries among disciplines of knowledge along with semi-autonomous development of knowledge in each field have been longstanding obstacles to inter-disciplinary thought and practice necessary for integrated impact assessment (Rattle and Kwiatkowski 2003). Relationships among environmental change and human health are emerging, complex and dynamic 13 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 15 posing challenges to both conceptualizing pathways resulting in human health effects and developing impact assessment methods to assess such effects. Health Impact Assessment: A Potential Catalyst For Integrating Health In EIAHealth Impact Assessment (HIA) describes a diverse set of processes along with a range of qualitative or quantitative methods to identify the health effects of public policy decisions, in turn, helping to shape policy to promote and protect health (Kemm 2004; Quigley et al. 2006). HIA is patterned after EIA, with a number of procedural steps accompanied by opportunities for stakeholder involvement (Quigley et. al. 2006). HIA views health holistically, considering not only bio-physical health effects, but also broader social, economic, and environmental influences. HIA also explicitly focuses on health benefits and the distribution of health impacts within a population (health equity). Like EIA, HIA strives to anticipate potential impacts for decision-makers and to deliver a set of concrete recommendations targeted at minimizing health risks and maximizing benefits. Broadly, current HIA approaches may be categorized into two groups: (1) HIA independent of EIA or ???voluntary??? and (2) HIA formally integrated with EIA or ???regulatory??? (Cole et al. 2004;Dannenburg et al. 2006). In European Union nations such as England and Sweden, HIA has evolved independent of EIA, and is applied in a wide range of public policy decisions not subject to EIA (Kemm 2004). On the other hand, countries such as Canada and Australia have developed formal guidance for integrating HIA into EIA (EnHealth 2001; Health Canada 1999). Australian HIA guidance explicitly recognizes that the inter-disciplinary approach offered by integrated HIA/EIA is desirable and efficient (Wright 2004). At the same time, the Australian experience has shown that integrated HIA/EIA tends to favor quantitative analytic methods, potentially limiting its scope. Canada has had positive though inconsistent success with expanding the traditional EIA approach to include explicit discussions of health determinants (McCaig 2005; Noble and Bronson 2005). 14 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 16 There is debate in the HIA literature regarding the relative benefits of the voluntary and regulatory approaches. In the U.S., proponents of the voluntary approach cite EIA???s procedural rigidity, narrow definition of health, strict rules of evidence, adversarial environment, and focus on the physical environment as reasons to develop HIA outside of the EIA process (Cole et al 2004). Cole and Fielding (2007) argue that ???it is far more likely that HIAs linked to EIA will conform to the limits of EIA rather than HIA truly expanding the scope of EIA.??? On the other hand, the voluntary HIAs conducted thus far in the U.S. vary considerably in scope and focus, analytic methods used, influence on the decision-making process, and opportunities for public participation (Dannenburg et al. 2008). Proponents of integrated HIA/EIA in the U.S. note that it can utilize existing statutory requirements for impact assessment and leverage explicit requirements for the mitigation of adverse impacts (Dannenburg et al. 2006; Bhatia 2007; Wernham 2007). Furthermore, the procedural rules and legal levers offered by EIA statutes offer a consistent, substantive opportunity for community engagement in government decision-making. Finally, because EIA formally requires the involvement of a range of institutions and disciplines, integrated HIA/EIA provides access to the multidisciplinary expertise required for analysis of complex pathways and a means to engage other public sectors in policy making to protect and promote health. The cases and discussion below provide further reflection on the value of integrated HIA/EIA in the U.S. Integrated HIA/EIA: Examples From PracticeThe U.S experience with HIA is limited; Dannenberg et al. (2008) documented only 27completed HIAs between 1999 and 2007, with a range of approaches including independent, voluntary HIAs addressing both EIA-based decisions and policy questions outside the EIA sphere, and formally integrated HIA/EIA. Because the field of HIA is still rapidly evolving in the U.S., and because there has been limited evaluation of HIA outcomes, the authors believe it is premature to advocatefor a single methodological approach. Below we present early examples of integrated HIA/EIA from15 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 17 two distinct settings, San Francisco, California and rural Alaska. These examples suggest that the formal integration of HIA into EIA offers a promising avenue for realizing a truly cross-sectoral approach to a wide range of public policy decisions that impact community health and well-being. San Francisco, California: Health Effects of Urban Rezoning Recent experience in San Francisco has demonstrated the ability of a local health department to play a constructive role in EIA and to gain consideration and mitigation of environmental health determinants not usually considered in the EIA process (Bhatia 2007). Traditionally, staff of the Department of Public Health???s (SFDPH) Environmental Health Section have sometimes participated in CEQA at the request of the San Francisco Department of City Planning (SFDCP), the lead agency for local CEQA compliance, or the Office of the City Attorney. Health agencyroles have included both conducting and reviewing environmental health risk assessments and ensuring that projects comply with local environmental regulations. Beginning in 2003, public demand emerged for the inclusion of a broader scope of health and social concerns in local EIAs, including the impacts of development on traffic safety; air quality; the adequacy of housing, parks, schools, and community facilities; and displacement of local businesses and low-income populations (Corburn 2007). The SFDPH responded to this demand with a more pro-active role in the EIA process. One of the first the SFDPH efforts concerned a proposal to demolish the Trinity Plaza Apartments, comprised of 360 rent-controlled units, and rebuild 1400 new condominiums in its place (Bhatia 2007). In their initial scoping determination, SFDCP officials concluded that the proposal would not have adverse impacts on human populations and housing because the project would contribute a net gain in dwelling units. In contrast, in public testimony residents and tenant advocates asserted that the City???s determination ignored the proposal???s human impacts -- evictions and changes in housing costs. Residents argued that the demolition and displacement of people 16 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 18 represented both a direct physical impact on tenants and an indirect impact on their health and well-being. The SFDPH undertook a brief HIA, synthesizing available data on housing affordability and residential displacement, providing local data on housing conditions, and qualitatively predicting the likely impacts of the demolition and displacement on health. The analysis corroborated community concerns and provided evidence for the likely adverse health consequences of the demolition, including psychological stress, fear, and insecurity due to eviction; crowding or substandard living conditions due to limited affordable replacement housing; food insecurity or hunger due to increased rent burdens; and the loss of supportive social networks due to displacement (SFDPH 2004). Focus groups conducted by the SFDPH provided further corroborating evidence by documenting health effects that were already occurring among tenants threatened with eviction (SFDPH 2005). The SFDPH input convinced SFDCP officials to revise the required scope of the project???s EIA to include residential displacement and any indirect impacts on health, unless the developer chose to mitigate these effects with a revised plan. Facing the possibility that the EIA would show significant adverse impacts, in tandem with vocal tenant opposition and consideration of legislation for a local moratorium on demolition, the developer agreed to negotiate with tenants and ultimately revised the development proposal to keep 360 of the new units rent-controlled with lifetime leasesfor existing tenants (Shaw 2005). Because the developer mitigated the impact through project design, a health analysis of displacement was not ultimately required in the project???s EIA. However, in subsequent city planning efforts, EIA has included analysis of residential displacement and city policies have been developed requiring the replacement of affordable housing lost in the development process (SFDCP 2007a).Following several similar project-specific efforts, the SFDPH extended its involvement in EIA to a more comprehensive planning process that was seeking to address land use conflicts in four San Francisco neighborhoods - the Eastern Neighborhoods community plans. These plans proposed rezoning land to allow new residential construction in proximity to high volume roadways, existing 17 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 19 industrial uses, and freight truck routes, posing a number of important questions for health typically not addressed within EIA. For example, analysis of project effects on ambient air quality was routinely included in EIA, yet the traditional approach took compliance with regulatory standards as an adequate proxy for protecting health, ignoring intra-urban variation of exposure sources, cumulative effects, and sensitive populations. Similarly, the analysis of noise levels estimated incremental changes but failed to evaluate related impacts of these changes on health. Finally, substantive analysis of the pedestrian safety impacts of development, though supported under CEQA, had not occurred historically. SFDPH undertook a health analysis of the rezoning plans, focusing on noise, roadway pollution, and pedestrian hazards, and was able to integrate the findings from these analyses directly into the draft EIR for the Eastern Neighborhoods Plans as co-authors (SFDCP 2007b). The draft EIR included new mitigation to require residential projects to analyze roadway pollution and mitigate effects on new residential uses through ventilation systems and building design. Similarly, the draft EIR recognized the significance of impacts of residential???industrial noise conflicts and required a stringent set of new regulations to avoid conflicts associated with mixed-use planning, potentially preventing business displacement. Planners did not create new requirements on development to mitigate pedestrian hazards, but did include polices to reduce traffic within the rezoning plans (SFDCP 2007a). An important outgrowth of SFDPH???s involvement in EIAs such as the rezoning proposals has been the development of a number of new methods to allow better prediction of health effects across the impacted local populations. These methods have been reported elsewhere, and include: (a) using an established-traffic noise model, calibrated with available citywide traffic and noise data, to predict area-level variation of population noise exposure and related health risks (Seto et al. 2007); employing a Gaussian dispersion model to predict air pollutant levels and pollutant-related health effects (SFDPH 2007b) (The map in Figure 1 illustrates modeled concentration of PM 2.5from traffic sources in the northeastern San Francisco County); and developing a multivariate regression 18 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 20 model to predict the rezoning plans??? impact on vehicle-pedestrian collisions at the level of the censustract based on transportation network data, proposed land uses, and demographics (Wier et al 2007). Another important consequence of this work has been the establishment of a day-to-day dialogue between the SFDCP and SFDPH. Because the issues analyzed in the Eastern Neighborhoods were relevant to development throughout San Francisco, the SFDPH and SFDCP are now working to codify some of the mitigation measures as new citywide regulations for planning. SFDCP is also routinely requesting the SFDPH to conduct noise and air quality analyses for other projects. Alaska???s North Slope: Tribes Demand an integrated HIA/EIA The Alaska Inter-Tribal Council (AITC), in cooperation the North Slope Borough (NSB), recently successfully advocated for the inclusion of HIA-based analyses in several federal EISs for North Slope oil and gas development (Wernham 2007). This is the first HIA formally integrated into a federal EIA reported in the U.S. (Dannenberg et al. 2008). This project was initiated by the impacted communities in partnership with AW (author) in response to long-standing community concerns regarding a range of health related impacts experienced by the Inupiat communities in the North Slope region, and evolved through collaboration between community stakeholder groups, public health professionals, and regulatory agencies. Inupiat communities had raised health concerns related to oil and gas development and its related impacts in public testimony for many years, but most of these concerns were not well-addressed in previous NEPA documents. Examples of issues raised by stakeholders include: (1) contaminant-based problems, such as the risk of cancer from consuming tainted fish and game, and increases in asthma from exposure to gas flaring; (2) nutritional impacts, including a shift away from a subsistence diet to store-bought foods accompanied by a rapid increase in diabetes and related metabolic disorders; and (3) social pathology, including epidemic suicide and domestic violence 19 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 21 (rates of which are now among the highest in the U.S.) and alcohol and drug abuse, attributed in part to the intense socio-cultural stresses placed on these small communities by nearby industrial activities. Working with AW, the AITC and NSB approached the federal regulatory agencies ??? the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Minerals Management Service (MMS) ??? and presented the arguments that (a) NEPA analyses on prior North Slope development had consistently failed to address public testimony on health concerns; (b) health impacts fall within the scope of impacts required by NEPA; (c) public health data are readily available to inform such an analysis; and (d) HIA provides an appropriate methodology. A dialogue ensued between tribal representatives, BLM and MMS management, and solicitors for the Interior Department. Ultimately, both the BLM and MMS accepted the fundamental premise that health should be included in an EIS, acknowledged that they lacked staff expertise to accomplish this, and invited AW to draft appropriate EIS subsections for three active NEPA processes. Two EISs were already underway. For these, brief subsections on health were drafted and submitted as formal comments during the draft EIS comment period; these rapid HIAs were integrated into the environmental justice chapters in the EISs (MMS 2007a; MMS, 2007b). The methodology involved a review of public testimony from the scoping and draft EIS phases and prior related projects, a literature review, and a descriptive analysis of the potential linkages between the environmental disturbances predicted in the draft EIS and health outcomes. Because these HIAs addressed oil and gas leasing programs several stages removed from actual development, and because they were completed late in the EIS process, new mitigation measures were not considered. MMS, however, made a commitment to pursue ???effective strategies for mitigating impacts to human health in cooperation with the Tribes, the NSB, and the AITC and other state and Federal agencies??? (MMS 2007b). For the third EIS, a Supplemental EIS for oil leasing in the National Petroleum Reserve, Alaska, the NSB became a cooperating agency at the outset of the NEPA process, and the NSB and 20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 22 AITC worked with BLM scientists to draft a fully integrated HIA including new health-focused mitigation measures (detailed in Table 1) (BLM 2007). This HIA was vetted with agency managementin Washington, D.C., subjected to internal agency reviews, and ultimately included in the EIS with virtually no modification.The most challenging issue encountered related to the BLM???s authority to regulate based on public health concerns. The BLM operates under the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), which confers broad authority for land management decisions, but says little about health. Consequently, although evaluating health impacts clearly falls under BLM???s NEPA responsibilities, in some instances BLM felt that it lacked authority under FLPMA to create new regulations based only on health concerns. BLM agreed to include certain measures that clearly lay within its authority (Table 1). Additionally, BLM drafted a new measure that would, for specific development proposals in the region, require developers to work directly with the appropriate health agencies and impacted communities to use HIA to identify potential health impacts and implement new health-based mitigation. Finally, BLM included an appendix to the EIS outlining successful examples of broader mitigation measures from international resource development near indigenous populations. This work has sparked interest from Tribes, state and federal regulatory agencies, and health agencies across Alaska. A tribal health organization recently decided to become a cooperating agency on an Environmental Protection Agency-led mining EIS; tribal groups, state and tribal health organizations, the ATSDR, Environmental Protection Agency, and mining industry executives recently attended a training led by AITC and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention???s National Center for Environmental Health on HIA, and the Environmental Protection Agency is now considering including a more rigorous and comprehensive approach to health impact analysis for several other anticipated mining EISs. Recently, a multi-national oil corporation expressed interest in supporting and building on local HIA efforts in Alaska as a part of its planning efforts for expanded offshore development. 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 23 Lessons Learned The practice of integrating HIA into EIA is in its infancy in the U.S.; still, the cases described above suggest that this approach can effectively promote the consideration of health impacts, health determinants, and the needs of vulnerable populations by policymakers in a broad spectrum of activity subject to EIA. Below the authors discuss several lessons which may help inform similar efforts elsewhere in the U.S. EIA Requirements Support a Broad Consideration of Health EffectsThe case examples suggest two overarching conclusions. First, despite the codified, litigious, and rigid procedures commonly used in EIA, lead agencies will often accept well-reasoned, scientifically-grounded public health arguments as justification to expand the scope of an EIA. Second, the scope of health issues that can be addressed through EIA is surprisingly broad, includingconcerns as diverse as traffic injuries, social cohesion, traditional subsistence diets, social problems such as domestic violence, and psychological problems such as stress from displacement. These findings can be explained by several observations. First, statutory requirements specific to health in EIA, coupled with the legal mandate for agencies to consider and respond to substantive public input create a powerful legal platform from which to advocate for health analysis and related mitigation. Second, the routine inclusion of social, economic, and broad-based environmental impact analyses in EIA naturally supports a broad perspective on health effects. Finally the growing strength of empiric evidence linking social, environmental, and economic conditions to health and health disparities supports forecasting how changes in societal conditions affect health outcomes. Integrating Health in EIA can Impact Public Policy The case examples also illustrate that the integrated HIA/EIA can result in new policies, regulatory measures, or project designs that protect and promote health. In the case of Trinity Plaza, 22 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 24 for example, documenting the potential impacts of displacement on health through the EIA process led the developer to modify the project design to include affordable housing units for existing tenants, mitigating the impact in advance of the EIA. The analysis of roadway air quality impacts in the Eastern Neighborhoods EIA is currently being translated into citywide planning and zoning regulations. In Alaska, integrated HIA/EIA led to the proposed adoption of new regulatory measures to monitor environmental and health indicators and to require HIA and site-specific mitigation for future development proposals; and it initiated a multilateral policy discussion regarding how to promote long-term socio-economic stability and community well-being. The power of this approach is being recognized by diverse community and social justice groups. In Oakland, California, for example, tenants??? advocates familiar with the San Francisco experience used public health evidence to articulate how a policy to facilitate the conversion of apartments to condominiums might lead to increased traffic, crowding, poor sanitation, and homelessness thus requiring an EIA (Perlmutter 2006). On this basis, advocates successfully argued for the City Council to send the condo conversion policy back for further study and revision. In Alaska, Tribes are now successfully bringing the issue of health into the regulatory process for a number of large industrial proposals. Collaboration with Affected Communities is Essential In each of the case examples, it was the combination of vigorous public testimony with public health expertise that finally led to the inclusion of health concerns in the EIA process. In both cases, communities had testified to a range of health related concerns without a substantive regulatory response. In Alaska, communities had raised concerns regarding the impacts of oil development on cultural stability and health in testimony over many years on multiple EIAs. In San Francisco, concerns about the effects of new residential development on community stability and economic livelihoods preceded SFDPH involvement in the EIA process by several years.23 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 25 Public testimony on EIAs frequently reflects a holistic perspective that naturally links diverse issues as housing affordability, displacement, cultural change, noise pollution, and political and social control with community health and well-being. In turn, health professionals can make a strong case for the importance of such impacts through citing data on the determinants of health, and thus validate and strengthen the case for considering them fully in an EIA. Conversely, agencies may disregard the input of health experts unless it is presented directly on behalf or in cooperation with an affected stakeholder community. In 2006, a team of environmental health students and faculty at the University of California at Berkeley (including author RB), the UC Berkeley Health Impact Group (UCBHIG) conducted a HIA on the proposed the Oak to Ninth Development Project???a new neighborhood with 3,100 new residences and 200,000 square feet of commercial space on 64 acres of publicly-owned waterfront land on the Oakland Estuary (Bhatia et al. 2006). The analysis specifically focused on health impacts raised in public testimony that were not adequately addressed in the project???s final EIA. While the HIA occurred late in the regulatory process, it included significant qualitative and quantitative conclusions regarding vehicle-pedestrian collisions resulting from project-generated traffic; noise and air pollutant impacts to future residents; the loss of public land for open space; displacement of low-income households, barriers to waterfront access; and safety of walking or biking to and from the development. Under CEQA, the City of Oakland had an obligation to consider additional facts in determining the adequacy of its EIA. Yet, despite direct and public communication with Planning Director, the Oakland PlanningCommission and the Oakland City Council, the HIA had little influence on the EIA, the design of the project or its subsequent regulatory decision-making. The limitations in this case most likely derived from the HIA team???s lack of standing in the EIA process: as an independent, academic group, the team was neither a cooperating agency nor was it directly collaborating with impacted communities. While in private some elected officialsacknowledged the HIA???s validity, elected officials appeared unwilling to challenge the judgments of the planning director (who had determined the EIA to be adequate), or the strong political support for 24 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 26 the project from its many proponents. In this case, a stronger alliance between impacted communities and the HIA team would have given the issue of health stronger standing in the EIA process. Subsequent HIAs conducted by the UCBHIG have involved close partnerships with community stakeholders, with explicit roles for analysis, communication, and advocacy. Predictive Judgments in HIA, as EIA, Require Appropriate Standards of EvidenceIn comparison with empirical public health research, neither EIA nor the policy and planning decisions it informs have rigorous standards for evidence: such decisions are made at the pace required by political or economic priorities, and based on available evidence and professional opinion. Given the methodological challenges involved in predicting health outcomes, public health professionals must balance the risk of making recommendations based on flawed analyses against the risk that readily preventable adverse health outcomes will not be recognized at all (Dannenburg et al. 2008; Parry and Stevens, 2001). By its nature, impact assessment involves reasoned judgments in the setting of multiple assumptions, uncertainties, and often incomplete baseline data (Veerman et al. 2007). In this context, there are two central challenges involved in integrating HIA and EIA. First, standards of evidence must reflect an appropriate balance of rigor and practicality, such that public health can provide beneficial input at the pace required by the EIA process. Second, HIA practitioners must develop an appropriate set of analytical tools (see subsection below). Causal certainty and quantitative precision are unrealistic and unnecessary standards for EIA. When there is insufficient information to make an important judgment, NEPA requires that either (a) an agency collect the data only if it can be obtained and the costs are not exorbitant, or (b) if the information cannot be obtained or costs are too great, that the agency rely on accepted theoretical approaches and that the assessment is ???not based on pure conjecture and is within the rule of reason??? (CEQ 1978 ??1508.22). Expert opinion has been found repeatedly to constitute a valid basis for EIA conclusions (see, for example, Greenpeace Action v. Franklin 1992). 25 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 27 The optimal mix of rigor and expediency depends on the decision context. In the case of Trinity Plaza, city officials were initially skeptical about the health effects of displacement, particularly those on mental health and those mediated through impacts on social cohesion. Yet, the SFDPH was able to produce compelling data linking affordable housing and displacement to health outcomes, and ultimately, SFDCP officials accepted this central premise without imposing requirements for additional modeling. Regardless of the scientific validity of HIA conclusions, HIA practitioners should expect some skepticism regarding complex health arguments that involve environmental, social and behavior pathways. In Alaska, the original skepticism of NEPA analysts and regulators appeared to be due to a basic lack of familiarity with public health principles -- such as the links between diet and diabetes or income and general health status ??? and resolved through ongoing discussions in which the cooperating agencies openly explored and debated public health principles and evidence. Practitioners Need Analytic Tools for HIAThere is a need for new analytical tools to translate the impacts presented in an EIA into valid health impact predictions. The development of these tools is facilitated by the interdisciplinary approach offered by EIA. For example, forecasting the impact of road traffic on respiratory disease in the Eastern Neighborhood case involved estimating the effect of the land use plans on vehicle flows using existing traffic models and observed traffic counts; the effect of vehicle flows on local air pollutant concentrations using available atmospheric dispersion models; and finally, the effect of pollutant exposure on respiratory disease using dose-response functions from epidemiologic studies. On the other hand, quantitative forecasting methods such as the SFDPH pedestrian injurycollision model are not necessarily more effective than non-quantitative approaches for achieving policy change. Quantitative conclusions may focus debate on the validity of the analytic technique, and divert attention from reasonable strategies to address obvious health concerns. For example, despite the rigorous process involved in creating and validating the pedestrian injury model, the 26 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 28 SFDCP criticized the methods as unproven. Ultimately, even the most rigorous quantitative impact assessment methods involve assumptions regarding the complex and multi-layered inputs of various social, economic, and environmental factors ??? assumptions that can limit both their acceptance and their validity.Adaptive Management is an approach that recognizes the inherent uncertainty of prospective impact estimates. Adaptive management applies an iterative process in which initial predictions are used to make a management plan, and outcome monitoring is relied on both to adjust the outcome predictions and to modify management strategies (Murray and Marmorek 2003; Steinemann 2000). EIA has been specifically criticized for the lack of this sort of prospective outcome monitoring (Canter 1997; Karkainnen 2002). In Alaska, several of the proposed health mitigation measures relied on adaptive management, through creating requirements for baselineand ongoing monitoring of health outcomes and specifying a mechanism through which BLM could alter its management requirements based on the monitoring outcomes. A Cooperative Inter-Disciplinary Practice Can Evolve Despite the statutory support for including health in EIA, the often contentious and adversarial atmosphere surrounding EIA poses a potential barrier to the addition of health issues. Project proponents may resist health analysis because of fear that such analysis is being motivated primarily by opposition to a project and the desire to avoid confrontation and potential legal challenges may limit the interest of regulators (Cole et al. 2004; Steinemann 2000). In the authors??? experience, however, establishing a mutually respectful inter-disciplinary collaboration can mitigate such barriers. In the Eastern Neighborhoods example, SFDPH responded to the SFDCP???s concerns about methodological consistency by developing analytic methods for noise and air quality impacts and suggesting citywide significance standards. Consequently, the SFDCP accepted much of the subsequent analysis without argument, which shifted the focus of discussions to the feasibility of potential mitigations and design alternatives. In Alaska, after a legal review by 27 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 29 agency solicitors, the federal regulatory agencies acknowledged that evidence-based public health information presented by impacted communities could not be ignored. In the cooperative relationship that developed, NEPA analysts greeted the additional health information with enthusiasm, commenting that it improved the EIA and helped to give context to other aspects of the analysis, to focus the process on the needs of the stakeholders, and to reduce the acrimony often present between the agencies and local communities. Industry proponents should also be viewed as important potential collaborators in integrated HIA/EIA. Increasingly, internal corporate ???good neighbor??? policies include requirements for both EIA and HIA, and for comprehensive ???environment, health, and safety management plans??? to mitigateidentified impacts (IPIECA 2005; SEIC 2006). Directives of the International Finance Corporation now contain explicit standards and guidance addressing human health (IFC 2007). Power imbalances between small communities and large developers can compromise the efficacy of voluntary, corporate impact assessment and mitigation plans. But the use of community-driven, integrated HIA/EIA may offer local communities substantially more leverage in negotiatingreasonable agreements. In Oakland, stakeholders, supported by the non-profit Human Impact Partners, have begun to develop a community-based practice of HIA that involves developers and that informs the City???s EIA process (HIP 2008). In the Alaskan case example, BLM felt that it had limited regulatory authority to address several of the specific health concerns, and instead suggested measures that would encourage developers to work directly with the impacted community and health authorities to develop health-focused mitigation. Since publication of the Northeast NPR-A draft EIA (Table 1), one multinational oil developer has approached the NSB to discuss collaboration on HIA and sustainable development planning. Conclusion: A Vision and Recommendations for Integrated PracticeIn the environmental sector, policy debates are commonly framed as conflicts between environmental preservation and the economic well-being of communities. This perspective ignores 28 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 30 the interdependence of human health and the integrity of the natural environment, as well as the complex social, economic, and health effects of environmental management decisions. In the health sector, on the other hand, objectives such as those outlined in Healthy People 2010 center on promoting healthy communities and eliminating health disparities (USDHSS 1999). Population health goals can only be achieved through a truly cross-sectoral approach that engages every agency that makes decisions which impact social, economic, and environmental conditions. The authors believe that EIA presents an opportunity for the field of public health to participate in a cross-sectoral approach with influence on the planning, evaluation, and execution of a wide range of activities that fundamentally shape the living conditions in communities across the U.S. The case examples demonstrate that a legal framework supporting the inclusion of health in EIA in the U.S. exists at the federal level and likely in many states as well. Public health agencies, academic institutions, and professionals should view EIA as a potentially effective tool to integrate health objectives into a wide range of policy decisions. Health analysis under NEPA can be accomplished by a public health agency, a university, or a private public health consultant working in collaboration with the impacted community and the lead agency. Realizing a vision of an integrated health and environmental analysis would enable a powerful policy lever for population health and health equity. To achieve these goals, the authors offer the following recommendations: ??? Engagement with local EIA and lead agencies: Public Health agencies and academic institutions should familiarize themselves with regional EIA activities, and participate, either through HIA or simply through providing comments, where either public testimony or obvious public health concerns indicate a need. ??? Engagement with impacted communities: Health agencies should familiarize themselves with community concerns regarding active EIAs, and partner with the community to explore how public health data and expertise might be used to inform these concerns. 29 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 31 ??? Capacity and Workforce Needs: Effective participation in the EIA process will require PublicHealth staff with time and at least basic familiarity with EIA and HIA. Only one university graduate school course on HIA exists in the U.S. Schools of public health and continuing education courses should consider offering HIA training as part of a core skill set for publichealth professionals. ???Funding HIA: Some involvement in EIA may be feasible within existing budgets of public health agencies through the re-prioritization and training of existing staff positions. Agencies without such flexibility should evaluate potential alternative funding mechanisms for EIA participation, including direct payments by developers (required in some EIAs); funding from lead agencies for cooperating agency work (rare); regulatory agency grant programs (a number of agencies have programs, such as EPA???s environmental justice grants, that could be applicable); and private grantors. Participation in EIA may prove to be a cost and time-effective health intervention in the long run. ??? Guidance for Health Analysis: Health and environmental regulatory agencies should advocate for formal federal guidance on incorporating health in EIA, building on the examples of Australia, Canada, and the IFC. It is worth noting that guidance for Social Impact Assessment and Environmental Justice contributed to institutionalizing these issues as routine considerations within EIA (Burdge 1988; Bass 1998) ??? Evaluation Criteria and Monitoring: Evaluation criteria have been proposed for HIA, but HIA practice has been subject to limited evaluation (Parry 2005). Issues important for HIA/EIA evaluation include analytic validity, issue relevance, public involvement, and impacts on decisions as well as decision-makers and decision-making practices. HIA/EIA integration also offers the opportunity to institute adaptive management or mitigation measures that require ongoing monitoring ??? of both health outcomes and environmental factors known to affect health ??? an effort which will contribute to the efficacy and accuracy of HIA methods. 30 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 32 ??? Collaboration with Other HIA and EIA Proponents: NEPA called for an interdisciplinary analysis on all environmental issues important to people (CEQ 1978 ??1502.6). Open collaboration and discussion between public health professionals interested in HIA/EIA willfacilitate the success of individual efforts. 31 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 33 List of References Arquiaga MC, Canter, L.W., Nelson, D.I. 1994. Integration of Health Impact Considerations in Environmental Impact Studies. Impact Assessment. 12:175-197. Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control vs. City of Bakersfield. 2004. Case No. F044943, California Court of Appeals, Fifth District. Fresno, CA. Bass R. 1998. Evaluating Environmental Justice under the National Environmental Policy Act. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 18:83-92. Bauser D. 1985. Through the looking glass and back again: the PANE case, a rebuttal. Harvard Environmental Law Review 9:211-231.Bhatia R, Seto E, Rivard T, Gaydos M, Kuiper H, Minjares R, Ortega A, Rotkin-Ellmen M. UC Berkeley Health Impact Group. 2006. Oak to Ninth Avenue Health Impact Assessment. Berkeley, California,CA: UC Berkeley Health Impact Group. Available: http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/hia/[accessed 2 April 2008] Bhatia R. 2007. Protecting Health Using Environmental Impact Assessment. American Journal of Public Health. 97:406-413. Black H. 2004. Imperfect Protection: NEPA at 35. Environmental Health Perspectives 112:A292-295. BLM. 2007. Northeast NPR-A Draft Supplemental IAP/EIS. Washington, D.C.: Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management.Burdge RJ. 1998. A Conceptual Approach to Social Impact Assessment. Social Middleton, Vermont:Ecology Press. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2005. California Public Resources Code. Sections 21000-21177. Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Department of Food & Agriculture. 2005. Case No. A107088. California Court of Appeals, First District. San Francisco, CA. 32 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 34 Canter L, Clark R. 1997. NEPA Effectiveness???A Survey of Academics. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 17:313-327. CCR. 2007. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act. California Code of Regulations. Sections 15000-15387. CDOT. 1997. Environmental Handbook. Vol 4. Community Impact Assessment. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Transportation. CEDA. 2006. Oak to Ninth Avenue Final Environmental Impact Report. 2006. Oakland, CA: California: Community Economic Development Agency. CEQ. 1978. Council on Environmental Quality Regulations for Implementing NEPA. 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508.CEQ. 1997a. Environmental Justice: Guidance under the National Environmental Health Policy Act. Washington, DC.: President???s Council on Environmental Quality.CEQ. 1997b. The National Environmental Health Policy Act: A Study of its Effectiveness after Twenty Five Years. Washington, DC.: President???s Council on Environmental Quality.Clinton WJ. 1994. Executive Order 12898: Federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations and low-income populations. Federal Register 59: 7269.Washington, D.C.: White House. Available: http://epa.gov/Region2/ej/exec_order_12898.pdf. [accessed 2 April 2008].Cole B, Fielding J. 2007. Health Impact Assessment: a Tool to Help Policy Makers Understand Health Beyond Health Care. Annual Reviews of Public Health. 28:393-412. Cole B, Wilhelm M, Long P, Fielding J, Kominski G. and Morgenstern H. 2004. Prospects for Health Impact Assessment in the United States: New and Improved Environmental Impact Assessment of Something Different? Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 29:1153-1186. 33 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 35 Connaughton J. 2002. Memorandum for the Heads Of Federal Agencies; Cooperating Agencies In Implementing the Procedural Requirements Of the National Environmental Policy Act. Washington, D.C.: Council on Environmental Quality.Corburn J, Bhatia R. 2007. Health Impact Assessment in San Francisco: Incorporating the. Social Determinants of Health into Environmental Planning. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 50:323-341.Dannenberg A, Bhatia R, Cole B, Heaton S, Feldman J, Rutt C. 2008. Use of Health Impact Assessment in the United States: 27 Case Studies, 1999-2007. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 34:241-256. Dannenberg AL, Bhatia R, Cole BL, Dora C. Fielding JE, Kraft K et al. 2006. Growing the Field of Health Impact Assessment in the United States: An Agenda for Research and Practice. American Journal of Public Health. 96:262-270. Davies K, Sadler B. 1997. Environmental Assessment and human health: perspectives, approaches, and future directions. Ottawa: Health Canada. Douglas K, Vander Sluis M, Douglas I. 2005. Everyday Heroes: Thirty-five Years of the California Environmental Quality Act. Sacramento, CA: Planning and Conservation League Foundation. EnHealth. 2001. Health Impact Assessment Guidelines. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. Frumkin H, Frank L, Jackson R. 2004. Urban Sprawl and Public Health: Designing, Planning, and Building for Healthy Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. Greenpeace Action v. Franklin. 1992. Case no. 91-36062. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, San Francisco, CA.Hanna K, Coussens C. 2001. Rebuilding the Unity of Health and the Environment: a new vision of environmental health for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Health Canada. 2004. Canadian Handbook On Health Impact Assessment - Volume 1: The Basics. Ottawa, Canada: Health Canada. 34 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 36 HIP (Human Impact Partners). 2008. Available: http://www.humanimpact.org [accessed 2 April 2008]. IPIECA. 2005. A Guide to Health Impact Assessments in the Oil and Gas Industry. International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association. Available: http://www.ipieca.org/activities/health/downloads/publications/hia.pdf. [accessed 2 April 2008]. Jackson H. 1969. Hearings on S. 1075, S.237, and S. 1752, Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. 118. Johnson WB, Ludwig FL, Dabberdt WF, Allen RJ. 1973 An Urban Diffusion Simulation Model For Carbon Monoxide. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association. 23:490-498.Jordan, W.S. III. 1984. Psychological harm after PANE: NEPA???s requirement to consider psychological damage. Harvard Environmental Law Review 8:55-85. Karkkainen BC. 2002. Towards a Smarter NEPA: Monitoring and managing government???senvironmental performance. Columbia Law Review. 102:903-972. Kemm J, Parry J, eds. 2004. Health impact assessment: Concepts, techniques and applications. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Marmot M, Wilkinson R, eds. 1999. The Social Determinants of Health. New York City: Oxford University Press. McCaig K. 2005. Canadian Insights: The challenges of an integrated environmental assessment framework. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 25:737-746. MMS. 2007a. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Chukchi Sea Planning Area: Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193 and Seismic Surveying Activities in the Chukchi Sea. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service. MMS. Minerals Management Service.2007b. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program: 2007-2012. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 35 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 37 Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service. U.S. Department of the Interior: Washington, D.C Murray C, and Marmorek D. 2003 Adaptive Management and Ecological Restoration. In: Freiderici P (ed) Ecological Restoration of Southwestern Ponderosa Pine Forests. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. 417-428. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). 1969. Public Law. 91-190, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4347. National Research Council. 2003. Cumulative environmental effects of oil and gas activities on Alaska???s North Slope. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. Noble BF Bronson JE. 2006. Practitioner survey of the state of health integration in environmental assessment: The case of northern Canada. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 26:410-424.Noble BF, Bronson JE. 2005. Integrating Human Health into Environmental Impact Assessment: CaseStudies of Canada???s Northern Mining Resource Sector. Arctic 58:395-405. Parry J, Stevens A. 2001. Prospective health impact assessment: pitfalls, problems, and possible ways forward. British Medical Journal. 323:1177-1182. Parry JM, Kemm J. 2005. Criteria for use in the evaluation of health impact assessments. Public Health. 119:1122-1129.People against Nuclear Energy (PANE) v. Metropolitan Edison. 1983. Case no. 81-2399. U.S. Supreme Court. Washington, DC. Perlmutter R. 2006. Letter to the City of Oakland Planning Commission Regarding Revisions to Title 16 of the Oakland Municipal Code Regarding Conversion of Rental Housing to Condominium Ownership. Pruss-Ustun A, Corvalan C. 2006. Preventing disease through healthy environments. Towards an estimate of the environmental burden of disease. Geneva: World health Organization. 36 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 38 Quigley R, den Broeder L, Furu P, Bond A, Cave B, Bos R. 2006. Health Impact Assessment. International Best Practice Principles. International Association of Impact Assessment. Special Publication Series No. 5. Fargo, North Dakota: IAIA. Rattle R Kwiatkowski RE. 2003. Integrating health and social impact assessment. In: Becker HA, Vanclay F. Eds. The International Handbook of Social Impact Assessment. Conceptual and Methodological Advances. Cheltenham,UK: Edward Elgar. 92-107. SEIC. 2006. Sakhalin Indigenous Minorities Development Plan. First Five-year Plan (2006-2010). Russia: Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Ltd. Available: http://www.sakhalinenergy.com/en/documents/doc_lender_soc_4.pdf. [accessed 2 April2008]. Seto EY, Holt A, Rivard T, Bhatia R. 2007. Spatial distribution of traffic induced noise exposures in a US city: an analytic tool for assessing the health impacts of urban planning decisions. International Journal of Health Geography. 6:24. SFDCP. 2007a. Draft East Soma Area Plan. San Francisco: San Francisco Department of City Planning. Available: http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=25336. [accessed 2 April 2008]. SFDCP. 2007b. Eastern Neighborhoods Rezoning and Area Plans Draft Environmental Impact Report. San Francisco: City and County of San Francisco Department of City Planning. Available: http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=65696. [accessed 2 April 2008]. SFDPH. 2004. The Case for Housing Impacts Assessment: The Human Health and Social Impacts of Inadequate Housing and Their Consideration in CEQA Policy and Practice. San Francisco: San Francisco Department of Public Health. SFDPH. 2005. Anticipated Effects of Residential Displacement on Health: Results from Qualitative Research. San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Department of Public Health. 37 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 39 SFDPH. 2007. Assessment and Mitigation of Air Pollutant Health Effects from Intra-urban Roadways: Draft Guidance for Land Use Planning and Environmental Review. San Francisco: San Francisco Department of Public Health. Shaw R. 2005. Breaking New: Historic Trinity Plaza Deal Finalized. Beyond Chronicle. San Francisco, CA. 9 July. Steinemann A. 2000. Rethinking Human health impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 20:627-645. USDHHS. 1999. Healthy People 2010. Washington, D.C.: US Department of Health and Human Services. Veerman JL Mackenbach JP, Barendregt JJ. 2007. Validity of Predictions in health impact assessment. J. Epidemiology Community Health. 61:363-366. Wernham A. 2007. Inupiat Health and Proposed Alaskan Oil Development: Results of the First Integrated Health Impact Assessment/Environmental Impact Statement of Proposed Oil Development on Alaska???s North Slope. Ecohealth. 4:500-513 Wier M, Bhatia R, Weintraub J. 2007. Predicting Pedestrian Injury Collisions in San Francisco, California: An Area-level Model. San Francisco: San Francisco Department of Public Health. WHO. 1986. Ottawa Charter on Health Promotion. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Wright JSF. 2004. HIA in Australia In: Health impact assessment: Concepts, techniques and applications. (Kemm J, Parry J, eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 223-233. Yost NC. 2003. NEPA Deskbook 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Law Institute. 38 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 40 Table 1: Key Elements of Health Impact Assessments Integrated Within Environmental Impact Assessments in California (San Francisco) and Alaska, United States Name of PolicyProgram or Project, Description, Location, Year Organization conducting HIA Integrated HIA /EIA Approach & Research Methods Key Findings Regulatory Outcomes Trinity Plaza Redevelopment, Proposal to demolish and redevelop rent-controlled housing as private condominiums San Francisco, CA 2003 San FranciscoDepartment ofPublic Health Desktop HIA: scope based on document review & publictestimony; appraisal through expert judgmentsupported by empirical evidence, local secondary data, and focus group findings; findings provided as comments on scope ofEIR Project would result indisplacement, housing cost burdens, relocation, or substandard housing for evicted tenants; mitigationsuggested to provide replacement housing for existing tenants. Decision-makers required the projectproponent to provide replacement housing for existing residents or analyze displacementimpacts in an EIR. EasternNeighborhoods Rezoning & Area PlansRezoning of fourindustrial and mixed use neighborhoods for greater residential use San Francisco, CA 2007 San FranciscoDepartment ofPublic Health Qualitative and quantitative analysis integrated within EIA. Scope: roadway air pollutants; land use???noise conflicts, andpedestrian safety; Appraisal based on expert judgment, regulatory experience, noise and air quality exposure analysis, pedestrian collisionmodeling, quantitative health hazard assessment, and research on mitigation strategies. Significant impacts on mortality and respiratory disease due to roadway-residential use proximity; impacts on noise exposure and business displacementdue to industrial???residential use conflicts; impacts on pedestrian collisions due to roadway???residential use conflicts. Suggested mitigations included building ventilation and filtration; noise assessment and acoustical controls; traffic calming; pedestrian safety engineering countermeasures; and traffic demand reduction. The draft EIR included health impacts analysis of roadway pollution, noise, and pedestrian collisions, related findings ofsignificance findings. Mitigation measures included requirements for project level noise and air quality assessments and protective building design. 39 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 41 Chukchi Sea Planning Area Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193 Anchorage, Alaska 2007 Alaska Inter-Tribal Council and North Slope Borough Desktop HIA: including description of logic pathways, supported by public health data and public testimony on related EISs. Not addressed. Outer Continental Shelf Oil & Gas Leasing Program: 2007-2012 Washington, DC2007 Alaska Inter-Tribal Council and North Slope Borough Desktop HIA: including description of logic pathways, supported by public health data and public testimony on related EISs. Similar impacts in each of the three HIAs: Displacement of subsistence animals and hunters, leading to dietary change, and increased risk of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and food insecurity. Disruption of environment coupled with marked influx of oil and gas workers leading to social strain, cultural change, and the potential for increased access to drugs and alcohol, with the resultant increased risk of social pathology (domestic violence, suicide,drug and alcohol problems) and injury. Potential infectious disease transmission between oil camps and villages. Agreement to address new health-focused mitigation at the lease-sale stage. 40 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 42 Northeast NPR-A Supplemental EIS Anchorage, Alaska 2007 Alaska Inter-Tribal Council and North Slope Borough Integrated HIA/EIS: combination of public meetings, literature review, and scientific meetings among EIS team and public health experts used to delineate impact pathways and project qualitative outcomes.New mitigation measures considered in EIS, including: 1.Requirement that industry must identify and mitigate any possible health impacts for all development plans in the region. 2.Monitoring of subsistence harvest, with restrictions in development activity if reductions attributable to development occur. 3.Monitoring of Health Indicators, with potential modifications in development operations if adverse outcomes occur. 4.Monitoring of contaminants in environment and subsistence foods. 5.Employee orientation to include infection control and drug/alcohol policy information. Creation of a scientific review panel tomonitor and mitigate health impacts in the case of a large oil spill. 41 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 43 Figure 1. The map illustrates modeled concentration of PM 2.5from traffic sources on roadways, excluding highways, in the northeastern part of San Francisco County. Modeled concentrations are based upon the STREET Gaussian dispersion model developed for urban environments (Johnson 1973). 42 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 44 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 25 23:26:39 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:26:39 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Canada - Maple Leaf contaminated meat products - 12 dead Message-ID: CANADA: Number of confirmed cases, deaths linked to listeriosis increases 25.aug.08 CBC News http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/08/25/health-listeriosis.html Canadian Press http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5iKLvAnJGK7KHuWtT9tWUamt4FY-g Reuters http://www.reuters.com/article/governmentFilingsNews/idUSN2526525120080825?sp=true CTV.ca http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080824/listeria_expansion_080825/20080825?hub=Health The number of confirmed cases and deaths linked to listeriosis have risen, according to public health officials. There are now 26 confirmed cases of the bacterium, Listeria monocytogenes, up from 21, Dr. Mark Raizenne, director general of the Public Health Agency of Canada's centre for food-borne, environmental and zoonotic infectious diseases, said Monday afternoon at a news conference in Ottawa. He also said the number of deaths is now 12, up from four in Ontario and B.C. The number of suspected cases is now 29, down from 30, he said. Public health officials said over the weekend to expect the number of suspected and confirmed cases of listeriosis to increase because of the bacterium's long incubation period. The numbers also have changed because provincial public health officials have redefined how they count people affected by the listeria outbreak strain, federal Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said. "Our number of confirmed cases will include anyone that had this strain in their body at the time of death, whether it's the actual cause of death or not," he said. He said this altered the death count and that the change in the case definition was made to "ensure the numbers are as comprehensive as possible." Company spokeswoman Linda Smith acknowledged that inspectors failed to detect listeria in this case, but they are constantly swabbing for the bacterium, stating, "Did we find it? Absolutely not. We did not find that listeria. Did we let people down? Yes. But we were doing the right things." Smith said Maple Leaf's practices "meet or exceed regulatory standards by a substantial margin." "We're inspected regularly by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. All of our plants are federally registered, the highest level of food safety in Canada and they have full-time inspectors on site," she said. Rick Holley, a food science professor with the University of Manitoba, said he wasn't surprised to learn of the listeria outbreak since Canada's tracking of food-related illnesses is inadequate, stating, "I am constantly troubled by the lack of surveillance information on food-borne and water-borne illnesses in Canada.? He said the United States tracks down each type of food-borne illness, resulting in safer practices and better detection. Senior executives of Maple Leaf have acknowledged that the same strain of Listeria that has been linked to the fatal outbreak has also been detected in one of its plants. But Maple Leaf chief financial officer Michael Vels told analysts Monday morning that there's been no direct link between the deaths and his company's products. Maple Leaf shares closed 10 percent lower at C$8.80 ahead of the announcement of the latest deaths. A lawyer known for aggressively pursuing class action lawsuits, including against tainted pet food maker Menu Foods Income Fund, said his firm will take action against Maple Leaf. "It's apparent, immediately, that the company has been downplaying the significance of what's going on," Tony Merchant said in an interview with CTV News. Chief Public Health Officer Dr. David Butler-Jones told CTV's Canada AM that, "As a country we're still looking at relatively small numbers, but the incubation period -- the time from when you are exposed to when you get sick -- can vary from as small as three days to over two months." Despite the four deaths, Health Minister Tony Clement said authorities acted quickly to warn Canadians about the outbreak and called it a "success." Butler-Jones agreed the handling of the outbreak has been successful so far. He said Canada has one of the safest food distribution and preparation systems in the world -- but it's not 100 per cent safe, and food poisoning and bacteria outbreaks will occur from time to time. "Being able to recognize it and then do things to limit that impact -- that's really where the system can kick in," he said. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 26 01:39:25 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:39:25 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> San Bonito County food contamination - dirty deer ? Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: There is still research money to look at wildlife and Ecoli O157 and Salinas Valley food contamination. Gosh - where are the studies on the irrigation water that comes from the Monterey Wastewater Treatment Plant? The sewage effluent is the only source of water for some parts of the valley and is sprayed on tender greens like spinach and raw fruits like strawberries. ............................................................................................... CALIFORNIA: Study examines link between wildlife and E. coli 25.aug.08 The Packer John Chadwell http://thepacker.com/icms/_dtaa2/content/wrapper.asp?alink=2008-105745-194.asp&stype=topstory&fb The California Department of Fish and Game has begun a study to see if there is any connection between wildlife and E. coli, enlisting the help of deer hunters to provide testing samples. The study is a direct result of the 2006 E. coli outbreak traced back to a field of spinach in San Bonito County, which some believe may have been contaminated by wild pigs. But there has not been definitive scientific evidence linking wildlife and the presence of E. coli in vegetables grown in the state. The three-year study will concentrate on collecting samples in three coastal counties, taking advantage of deer hunting season, Aug. 9?Sept. 21. The department is providing hunters with collection kits to save a section of deer colons. Researchers will test the samples for E. coli. ?This is just one part of the study,? said Andrew Gordus, department of fish and game senior environmental scientist, who is heading the study. ?We?re planning on collecting black-tail deer and wild pig colon samples from hunters and depredation permits, and we?ll be netting birds and trapping small mammals, which will not be killed.? He said the study is in collaboration with the University of California-Davis, funded through a grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture?s Agricultural Research Service, along with funding from a department of fish and game grant. ?Investigators did isolate the same strain of E. coli during the 2006 outbreak from wild pigs, but they never had the science to make the true connection from the pigs to that specific outbreak,? Gordus said. Gordus said he handed out kits to about 150 hunters at Fort Hunter Liggett on opening day of hunting season. On Aug. 12, he had collected seven deer colon samples, but during the study, he hopes to collect as many as 2,400 samples. ?We need that many because the prevalence (of E. coli) is so low you need to increase the sample size,? he said. ?If you have a prevalence of 40%, you know it?s there, but when it?s down to 3% to 5%, you need a large sample size to determine if it?s truly there or not.? From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 26 13:23:38 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:23:38 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> N-Viro Halifax - CEO opinion - our sludge is good Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Here is an infomercial-style opinion piece from the CEO of N-Viro Canada admiring his own sludge. First - lets review the language. He says there are untreated biosolids. No - biosolids (aka sludges) are the residue of wastewater treatment. So there is no such thing as 'untreated' sludge biosolids since the sludge is the removed solids from wastewater treatment. Rae Wallin claims that Halifax N-Viro sludge has met all applicable 'guidelines'. It has not been approved by the Fertilizer Section of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The farmers of Nova Scotia were told that this stuff meets fertilizer requirements in Canada. It does not have a letter that it meets the requirements of the CFIA for soil ammendment. Wallin claims that this high pH lime ammendment is useful in the composting process. How is that? It would stop the composting process due to its very high alkalinity. The lime process generally produces more greenhouse gases than incineration or gasification - because these processes utilize the gases as fuel. The second story points out that the harbour isn't so very clean...that combined sewer overflow is still making beaches unswimable. The wastewater industry is spending hundreds of millions of public dollars on sewer systems, but still not achieving acceptable water quality, and is now toxifying farmland in addition to coastal waters. http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/1074480.html Biosolids process "safe, green and natural" By RAE WALLIN Fri. Aug 22 - 6:12 AM IT HAS TAKEN several decades, a financial commitment of $333 million, the co-operation of all three levels of government, as well as community and corporate support, but finally, Halifax Harbour is one step closer to achieving all the water quality objectives as set out by the residents of Halifax Regional Municipality. Once again, we are enjoying the many recreational opportunities available in our great harbour. N-Viro Systems Canada is proud to have worked with HRM to help put this bold initiative in place. We are particularly proud to bring to the Harbour Solutions Project a beneficial, sustainable approach to dealing with the processing of wastewater biosolids. N-Viro???s system is a safe, green and natural process that converts raw unprocessed wastewater biosolids into a valuable, organic biosolids soil-amendment resource. How is our process safe? We are different from untreated biosolids a product that is often erroneously referenced and linked in discussions regarding treated biosolids. We are able to take unprocessed wastewater biosolids and produce a treated product that meets or exceeds all applicable guidelines. HRMs Biosolids Processing Facility (BPF), located in the Aerotech Business Park and operated by N-Viro Canada, produces a Class A rated product as defined by Nova Scotia Department of Environment guidelines and regularly attains exceptional quality (EQ) rating. N-Viro soil also meets the requirements of the United States Environmental Protection Agencys standard for EQ Class A pathogen reduction material, as well as the Canadian Food Inspection Agencys standard as a soil amendment. Rigorous testing by independent laboratories ensures N-Viro soil meets or exceeds these parameters. And as far as thallium is concerned, our latest test results indicated no detectable thallium. N-Viro soil is an excellent beneficial re-use product with excellent soil neutralizing and conditioning properties. Our process destroys the pathogens normally present in raw unprocessed biosolids. That means the product coming from our Aerotech plant poses no public health or environmental risk. We contribute to the greening of the environment as well. Our process lowers greenhouse gas emissions by diverting biosolids from landfills. Our Aerotech product is a cost-effective and valuable soil improvement product highly sought after by the agricultural community in Nova Scotia. N-Viro soil amendment, when used in accordance with a proper nutrient management plan, helps Nova Scotias agricultural community maintain the natural capital of its soils so it can continue to be a productive supplier to Nova Scotia markets and beyond. This sustainability and cost effectiveness helps keep farmers on their farms and supports the growth of the Nova Scotia economy. N-Viro soil also has beneficial uses in the composting process, mixing with other soils to produce topsoil or for gravel pit or mine-site rehabilitation. It has been suggested by some that HRM landfill or incinerate its untreated biosolids. The Nova Scotia Environment Department does not permit disposal of untreated organic biosolids in landfills. Incineration of untreated biosolids would lead to increased emissions of greenhouse gases, reduce our air quality and simply destroy a valuable organic resource that can be safely treated to provide a beneficial soil amendment to the local community. As one of the companies involved with the Harbour Solutions Project, we want to offer our congratulations to residents of the Halifax Regional Municipality, Mayor Peter Kelly and members of regional council in celebrating the reopening of Black Rock and Dingle beaches to swimming and other recreational activities. The reopening of the beaches speaks to the success of the Halifax Harbour Solutions Project. Halifax regional council, in partnership with the federal and provincial governments, should be recognized for taking the lead on this important environmental matter. N-Viro will continue to work with HRM, the local agricultural community and our federal and provincial partners to deliver a product that is safe, natural and sustainable. We stand ready to continue to work with the HRM and area residents on this important initiative. Rae Wallin is president/CEO of N-Viro Systems Canada. ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' OK, everybody out of the water Heavy rains prompt closure of newly reopened Halifax beaches By DEVIN STEVENS Tue. Aug 5 2008 - 12:02 PM Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water . . . Black Rock Beach and the Dingle Tower beach ? the two Halifax sites reopened with great fanfare on Saturday ? were closed for business just 24 hours later and remained off limits Monday. "I went over to the Dingle this morning to go for a swim with my young son," Stacy O?Blenes, 40, of Halifax said over the phone Monday. "The lifeguards told me the beach was closed for high bacteria counts. Black Rock Beach in Point Pleasant Park and the Dingle Tower beach at Sir Sandford Fleming Park were both closed to public swimming more than three decades ago because high bacteria levels ? the result of 200 million litres of raw sewage being pumped into Halifax Harbour daily ? rendered the beaches unsafe. But the Harbour Solutions project, a new $330-million waste-water treatment system, went online earlier this year and the beaches were officially opened to the public Saturday. Mayor Peter Kelly and dozens of others attended beach parties at both locations. Just two days later, Mr. O?Blenes said, there were tampon applicators washed up on the beach. Mr. O?Blenes, his wife and their 18-month-old son were turned away from the Dingle beach Monday. He said a group of lifeguards also told three or four other families not to go in the water. "It?s a little ridiculous with the mayor jumping in and then the next day the beach is closed because of bacteria and stuff," Mr. O?Blenes said with a chuckle. "If I wasn?t at the beach there and I just hopped in off the rocks at Point Pleasant Park, there?d be nobody telling me not to go in." Mr. Kelly said the move was simply a precaution after heavy rains Saturday night. He said there had been no positive bacteria tests at either beach. Coun. Sue Uteck (Northwest Arm-South End) said the new sewage system can handle up to four times the normal amount of rainfall. Beyond that volume, the solids are still filtered out, but a lot of waste water is dumped without the full treatment. "It?s screened, but not to the point of what we?re doing with the Harbour Solutions," Ms. Uteck said in a telephone interview Monday. She said the city?s sewage specialist recommended the closures, and people trying to hit the beaches were understanding. "There is a sewage outfall down near the Port of Halifax," Ms. Uteck said. "It was just shut down as a precautionary measure and I think that?s a good thing." Mr. Kelly said staff would have the results of water quality tests today. He said even if the bacteria level is high, it won?t be for long. "As you recall, two weeks ago it also rained hard and the (bacteria) counts were back down very, very quickly," he said. Marlon Lewis, a professor of oceanography at Dalhousie University, said while news of the beaches has been in the media recently, he?s been taking readings from a scientific buoy off the coast. He said while it?s not raw sewage, the levels of algae and other particulates are the highest he?s seen in two years. ""What can I say, it was political,"" he said with a laugh Monday. ""They wanted to go in the water, they went in the water, it?s fine."" Mr. Lewis said Halifax has a pretty clean ocean environment for a city its size. He said he?s been in the water and never gotten sick. At the same time, he said, he would like the sewage plants to stop overflowing. On Monday afternoon, the beach closure notice still wasn?t available on the city?s website, nor was it mentioned on the beach phone line. Instead, after working through an automated phone system to the city?s beach office, a recording revealed the news. "Please note that due to high rain activity, we are closing, temporarily, the Dingle and Black Rock Beach for swimming," said a message dated Sunday. "(We?re) recommending nobody swim there until further notice." Mr. Kelly said he thought a public service announcement had been issued. He also said the Natal Day holiday may have had something to do with the lag. "We need to make sure that information is up to date," he said. For all his trouble, Mr. O?Blenes hasn?t ruled out a return trip to the Dingle ? but it won?t be soon. "It was a little disappointing," he said. "I guess we?ll have to see over time if it does get clean or if it continues to be dirty." http://thechronicleherald.ca/hullo/read/20/48728/48728 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 26 13:27:08 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:27:08 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Hawii - Synagro - Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide gas leaks at Sand Island Message-ID: http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080826/NEWS04/808260325/1008/LOCALNEWSFRONT Posted on: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 State looks into July gas leak at Sand Island By Peter Boylan Advertiser Staff Writer The state Department of Labor and Industrial Relations is investigating the leak of a potentially deadly gas at the Sand Island Wastewater Treatment Plant last month. No workers at the city facility were injured during the leak of hydrogen sulfide and methane during the week of July 6-11. Two workers have filed worker's compensation claims in connection with the leak. The leak was detected after employees in a neighboring building complained of a foul odor. Workers discovered the gas leaking from a manhole cover between buildings and remedied the situation in an hour. The city also brought in an outside consultant to evaluate repairs and air quality. The leak occurred after water in a plumbing p-trap ? which keeps the gases from backtracking ? dissipated to a point that allowed the gas to escape, according to the city. Investigators with the state Department of Health's Clean Air Branch found "no evidence of hazardous conditions or that the situation was mishandled," the city said. There is no way to tell how long the leak was occurring, the city said. Markus Owens, spokesman for the city Department of Environmental Services, said there were no reports of employees throwing up, passing out, requiring hospitalization or experiencing any other adverse reactions because of the leak. "If someone were to inhale that (gas), they would have passed out; if they inhaled it at the highest level, they would have been dead," Owens said. A city subcontractor, Synagro Wastewater Treatment Inc., is responsible for the system that maintains the gas. Synagro plant manager Kenny Huy declined comment yesterday, and said he could respond only to written questions. Over the last four years, the company has had similar incidents at treatment plants on the Mainland, according to the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Brief exposures to high concentrations of hydrogen sulfide (greater than 500 parts per million) can cause a loss of consciousness and possibly death. according to the U.S. Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Exposure to low concentrations of hydrogen sulfide may cause irritation to the eyes, nose, or throat and may cause difficulty in breathing for some asthmatics, according to the agency. Hydrogen sulfide is produced by human and animal wastes and remains in the atmosphere for about 18 hours. Methane gas is a greenhouse gas and a principal component of natural gas. It is formed and released to the atmosphere by biological processes occurring in anaerobic environments, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Reach Peter Boylan at pboylan at honoluluadvertiser.com. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 26 15:00:50 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:00:50 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Rot n Roll Composting - fertility, tumbling around, and steamy Message-ID: With its many helpful links - this story is best read in the web version at: http://www.grist.org/advice/how/2008/08/19/?source=most_popular ............................................................................. Rot 'n' Roll How to start composting GRIST magazine 19 Aug 2008 Dig in to get the dirt on composting. Composting is a lot like sex. It's a healthy, natural process involving fertility, tumbling around, and -- when it's going right -- steaminess. On top of that, some people call it dirty. It's not our fault we're squeamish. Most Americans are praised from an early age for taking out the garbage -- not hoarding it and keeping scraps of it in our kitchens. Toss in the false mythology that composting is complicated, smelly, and wormy, and it's understandable that we've wrinkled our collective noses at it. But no longer. Today, growing legions of converts are hot to rot, from celebs like Julia Roberts and Pierce Brosnan to heaps of urbanites, suburbanites, and local governments. Modern composting is easy, odor-free, and ultra-earth-friendly, providing rich, fertile soil that retains water and needs no nasty fertilizers or pesticides. The process -- in which microorganisms munch organic materials and break them down into dark, nutrient-rich humus (which should not be confused with ground chickpeas and will not taste good with pita bread) -- actually helps reduce global warming, since it slashes the CO2 and methane gases released when organic waste sits neglected in landfills. And the rewards are robust plants, fruits, and veggies -- a bountiful harvest indeed. Here's how to start digging in. >From A to Green continues below ADVERTISING POLICY Level One: The Baby Steps Don't leaf all this organic goodness in your garbage!Take a load off. The average American throws away more than 4 pounds of trash every day, up to half of which is compostable; New Yorkers alone toss enough garbage each day to fill the Empire State Building, according to the Clean Air Council. Time to stop trashing and start treasuring. For food waste, use a dishwasher-safe ceramic composting crock pot or other small vessel to collect scraps right on your kitchen counter. Toss in just about everything that isn't dairy, meat, fish, or oils and fats. Collect yard waste in bins or bags, whatever your town prefers. Kick it to the curb. In some places, the next step is as easy as walking to the curb. In San Francisco, for example, residents can put compost out in green bins for weekly pick-up. New York City, for its part, offers a downloadable "Worms in the Green Apple" [PDF] guide to public composting sites that welcome your waste. Other towns have composting projects at community gardens. To find a dump spot near you, call city hall or your local recycling center, or check out the online state listings at BioCycle magazine. Level Two: The Next Steps Manage your microbes, mini-style. No matter how small your digs might be, all that's needed to start your own compost system are nitrogen-rich "greens" (veggie and fruit scraps, coffee grounds, green plants, etc.) and carbon-rich "browns": dead flowers, leaves, twigs, and such. Even cramped urban dwellers can go compostal: Just collect those greens and browns in a container on your deck, balcony, or other outdoor spot. You can buy small composting bins online or, if you're on a modest budget, snag one of the reduced-price bins offered by dozens of cities, from Seattle and Santa Cruz to Anoka, Minn. Better yet, make your own bin. Expand your operations. Got more space and bigger composting goals? Buy one of the larger composting containers -- they come in tumblers or pyramid and beehive shapes, among others -- and start piling in the scraps. Another option: Make a DIY wire enclosure or, if anarchy is more your style, just start a heap in a dry, shady part of the yard. Keep your compost moist (not soggy) and give it air every week or so by turning it with a pitchfork. And to make sure your pile heats up (which means things are rotting properly), check out the simple do's and don't's offered in online guides [PDF] or at your local gardening store. Gotta hand it to 'em: those worms do wonders.Veni, vidi, vermi. Vermicomposting -- in which worms speed up the compost process -- is another way to turn waste into wondrous topsoil. Red wigglers, the most common compost squigglers, live happily in small indoor bins that you can make yourself and plop in your basement or, for apartment-dwellers, under the sink. (Worms need moist, cool, dark digs in temperatures between 40 and 80 degrees Fahrenheit, so keep them outside only in moderate climes, and don't let them roast in regular outdoor compost piles, which can reach 145 degrees or more.) Purchase composting worms online or try harvesting some night crawlers from your own backyard. Stuck on the yuck factor? Watch a vermicompost video to see how worthy worms can be. Level Three: The Big Step Don't waste another minute -- start composting now.Give a shit. Of all the leaps that eco-warriors are taking, embracing the humanure, um, movement, is one of the bravest. Fecal matter, as we all know, carries lethal diseases, stench, and the worst image problem on earth. But today those prejudices are getting flushed. Modern composting toilets, from the basic to the swanky, provide odor-free sanitary systems that morph human waste into safe and compacted compost -- without ugly visuals or other eww factors. Excretions go into a compartment where they break down into compost that can be buried in the yard, garden, or landscape. Since the units don't require water or electricity -- and don't need energy-and-chemical-laden waste treatment processes -- the environmental benefits are enormous. (Consider: About 40 percent of America's indoor water use goes to flushing toilets, wasting more than 4 billion gallons of H2O a day.) Composting privies are perfect for remote or arid landscapes; eco-conscious homeowners are trying them, too. To make sure they're legal in your state, check with your local public health department or consult The Humanure Handbook. Install one, and you'll have unbeatable greenness -- just a throne's stow away. Resources General composting information, tips, and advice How to Compost.org Compost Guide Green Culture Environmental Protection Agency YouGrowGirl Composting supplies Gardener's Supply Co. GreenCulture NatureMill Greenfeet Guides to neighborhood and community composting BioCycle magazine EPA guide to composting programs Wormy goodness City Farmer Freshtopia Earthworm Digest Worm Woman Composting toilets Sun-Mar Oikos EPA fact sheet [PDF] The Humanure Handbook From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 26 17:59:50 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:59:50 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> California - Managing Tailwater Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Tail water is the spent irrigation water running off farm fields and into surface waters. We know from Environment Canada research that the runoff from sludged fields contains prescription drugs and hormones and personal care product contaminants (Ed Topp) Don't we need to look closer at the environmental impact of agricultural tail water? Los Angeles sludge farm "Green Acres" leaks contaminated water into navigable waters of the US that flow into Buena Vista Aquatic Park. ............................................................................................ http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/AgAlertStory.cfm?ID=1076&ck=8A1E808B55FDE9455CB3D8857ED88389 California's water quality: Farmers take active role in protecting environment Issue Date: June 25, 2008 By Ching Lee Assistant Editor Stanislaus County farmer Tom Maring checked the irrigation water trickling down the rows of his tomato field and looked satisfied with its clarity. He noted that much of the sediment had settled out, which means the water won't be carrying with it the impurities that might have become attached to the soil particles. His goal is to have that water leaving his fields as clean as it was coming onto his farm, a task that many California farmers now are doing to effectively deal with the stringent water quality regulations aimed at reducing pollution in the state's waterways. Stanislaus County farmer Tom Maring poses in his Patterson tomato field, which sits on a steep slope and must be furrow irrigated.For farmers such as Maring, that task began many years ago, way before it became a regulatory requirement for farmers to monitor, test and manage their agricultural runoff. Maring said he did it to conserve resources and maximize his input. Water is so expensive, he noted, that he wants to ensure as much of it goes to his crops and not run off his property. "It's just become even more important to do a good job because the drains are so heavily scrutinized now," said Maring, who farms mostly processing tomatoes and cantaloupe, but also almonds, cherries, beans and spinach. Because his Patterson farm sits on a steep slope between the coastal foothills and the San Joaquin River, his crops are mostly furrow irrigated. The drop in elevation creates a challenge because irrigation water flows downhill, picking up soil and hauling it into the San Joaquin River. His goal is to be sure that excess water draining from his fields doesn't carry farm waste such as agricultural chemicals, fertilizers and sediment. "It's very difficult to get good irrigation efficiency unless you drain water, otherwise the top of the field would be real wet and the bottom would be real dry," he said. "That's our continuous focus - to try to save water and have good-quality water leave our fields." To manage that water, he developed a recirculation system that catches the excess water from his fields and other farms in the area into a settling pond. That water is then pumped back up to the top of the field, blended with fresh, new water and reapplied to his crops. "So we save water and we eliminate draining from our farm," he said. Tougher rules for farms Farmers have been using best management practices for years to reduce farm runoff and conserve water. This is a primary reason that for decades farms have been exempt from the state's water quality laws, which require businesses and municipalities to apply for water runoff permits and submit plans to reduce pollution. However, in 1999, after a successful lawsuit by environmentalists, the state passed Senate Bill 390, which required the state's nine regional water boards to review the effectiveness of the existing waivers and renew them or replace them with waste discharge requirements. Waivers not renewed automatically expired January 2003. To comply with SB 390, the regional water boards had to adopt revised waivers. "Each regional board that adopts one adopts it with different nuances depending on the key water quality issues in their area," said Danny Merkley, California Farm Bureau Federation director of water resources. In July 2003, the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, the largest of the state's regional water boards, adopted the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program, which imposed strict new rules on farmers and ranchers to monitor and test for water quality in nearby waterways, report findings to the regional board and implement steps to reduce discharges identified to have come from farms. Other regional boards followed suit and adopted similar conditional waiver programs for agricultural discharges. They include the Central Coast region, which adopted a waiver program that requires all irrigators, not just those who discharge into groundwater and surface water, to be a part of the program; the Los Angeles region, which covers watersheds in Los Angeles and Ventura counties; the San Diego region; and the Lahontan region, which adopted a conditional waiver program for irrigated and non-irrigated grazing land. "Although many have called this an agricultural waiver program, in fact, it's far from a waiver," said Merkley. "Because of the conditions for compliance, it is instead a tightly controlled regulatory program with exacting conditions." The Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board, which covers Imperial and Coachella valleys, has not adopted an irrigated lands waiver. Instead, it has implemented a conditional prohibition to address their sediment TMDL, or total maximum daily load, which is the maximum amount of any pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet state water quality standards. The other three regions, which include the North Coast, San Francisco Bay and Santa Ana, have no immediate plans to adopt agricultural waivers but may do so in the future to implement TMDLs. Under the new rules of the irrigated lands waiver, farmers and ranchers who discharge irrigation water or stormwater to off-site surface water bodies must consider whether they are required to be covered under the water board's Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program. If so, they can join a watershed coalition or go it alone by filing with their regional board as an individual farm. Tackling water quality problems Due to the enormous costs of the monitoring program - estimated at $10,000 to $18,000 to start and at least $2,000 per year thereafter - many farmers chose to share the burden with others by joining coalitions. Many county Farm Bureaus have worked with members to form their own coalitions in various regions of the state. Each coalition has been approved by the regional board, which provides continuous oversight and direction. But even as a coalition, monitoring and testing the state's myriad waterways is an expensive undertaking. Once a coalition is formed, there are also administrative, operational and other related costs to be covered. Most groups assess an annual per-acre rate of anywhere from 75 cents to $3. Some have flat fees, while others have a base rate, plus a per-acre charge. "Our costs have gone up proportionate to the increased amount of sampling we've had to do," said Parry Klassen, a Fresno County farmer and board chairman of the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, which represents some 640,000 irrigated acres of the region's 1.1 million irrigated acres. The group currently monitors 22 waterways and spends $40,000 a year on each site for such things as sampling, testing and reporting six times a year during the irrigation season and twice in the winter. Wayne Zipser, executive manager of the Stanislaus County Farm Bureau and co-chairman of the East San Joaquin Water Quality Coalition, said that through the efforts of the coalition, growers are becoming more aware of how their agricultural runoff is affecting the state's waterways. Now, the task is to show the regional board that there have been improvements made in those waterways and that the coalitions are working. When there is the occasional problem, growers quickly respond to resolve it, Zipser said. "Growers have been cooperative knowing that not succeeding in this is going to be a real detriment to agriculture," he said. "Our ongoing success in this area allows us to continue to stay in the coalition process and not go to individual waste discharge permits. I think we're headed in the right direction." Most farmers already follow best management practices, but there are also infrastructure changes to the farm that could improve water quality but require considerable time and capital to implement, and those changes are not going to happen overnight, he said. "I believe we are showing the progress necessary to ensure that farmers have the tools that we need to be able to farm," he said. "We've done pretty well. I think everyone has become more and more aware every day that we've got to make sure we're doing our part so that we don't get a black mark on us." Agriculture not always the problem Not all groups feel the process is working for them. In El Dorado County, much of which falls under the jurisdiction of the Central Valley regional board and where there are about 4,000 acres of irrigated agriculture, many feel that the regional board's one-size-fits-all approach unfairly penalizes them for water quality problems that are more urban than agriculture. "Up here, we apply very few chemicals," said Valerie Zentner, executive director of the El Dorado County Farm Bureau, which has formed the El Dorado County Agricultural Watershed Group. "We don't do flood irrigation. We're just really not a threat at all to the water quality. So it could be very devastating financially to our growers if the regional board continues to want the monitoring at the level that they've had in the past." She noted that toxicity tests have shown hits on so-called legacy pollutants, which are those that have been banned or restricted for several years but remain at detectable levels in sediment and tissue samples. There is also a mix of urban, suburban and agricultural uses in the watersheds the group is charged with monitoring, she added, "so we feel that some of the issues that we've found really are not our problem." One such issue is the occasional detection of E. coli in the waterways, she said. Since the county has no dairies or feedlots and the detections were found in waters where there are no farms spreading manure on their crops, the contamination could come from wildlife, leaky septic tanks, human activity or other sources. And while agriculture may not be at fault for the E. coli, Zentner said the regional board does not let the coalition "off the hook" on testing for the bacteria. The group is hoping to convince the regional board to grant a low-threat waiver for growers in the county when the board considers a new monitoring program next year that could allow more flexibility on what and how often a coalition needs to monitor. Some coalitions have taken a more targeted approach to their monitoring process. Chuck March, executive director of the Lake County Farm Bureau, which formed the Lake County Agricultural Lands Subwatershed Group, said the coalition did surveys with growers to identify specific sites to be placed in the monitoring program. "We don't have any real agricultural drains," he said. "The tributaries dry up during the summer so we've operated with a modified monitoring plan because we don't have runoff in the summer during the irrigation season." And like growers in El Dorado County, March said members of the Lake County watershed group also are frustrated with having to bear the responsibility for monitoring water bodies where agriculture is not the only contributing impact. "Our land use is really checkerboard patterns with a lot of rural residential lands intertwined within our agricultural lands, but we're the only group doing any type of water quality monitoring on any of the tributaries in the Clear Lake basin," he said. East region targets grazing In the Lahontan region, which covers the eastern Sierra stretching from the state border to the north and San Bernardino to the south, the conditional waiver program is focused on grazing land and geographically limited to the Bridgeport basin, located in northern Mono County and listed under the federal Clean Water Act as impaired due to nutrients and sediment. Cattle raising is the principal agricultural activity in this region, and Bridgeport Valley has one of the state's highest concentrations of livestock during the summer grazing months. Therefore, its ag waiver program is primarily monitoring for fecal coli form, and ranchers' management practices are designed to eliminate those pathogens. "That was a pretty reasonable way to do things because we don't have a lot of water quality problems in that basin and that would also allow them to target the constituent of concern and they could then design the waiver around that," said William Thomas, a rancher in the Bridgeport Valley. Unlike the controversial Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program in the Central Valley, Thomas said there were no big surprises with what came down in the Lahontan region because ranchers had already been working with the regional board on a monitoring plan years before there was any talk of an ag waiver. Under Lahontan's conditional waiver, ranchers sign up individually with the regional board, but they monitor and report collectively as a coalition. They monitor 11 sites in Bridgeport Valley beginning early in the spring, before the start of summer cattle grazing season, and continue through the summer and fall. About half the sites are located on streams and tributaries that contribute flow to the irrigated pasture complex. The others are located below cattle grazing land, where ranchers monitor the water that's draining out of those grazed areas. By monitoring water bodies above and below where cattle graze, ranchers hope to understand how much livestock activity is contributing to the increased fecal coli form levels in those watersheds. The results show that cattle are not the only contribution of fecal coli form--as the region accommodates quite a bit of recreation, as well as ranchettes and residential subdivisions, which suggest human and wildlife contributions, said Thomas. "The question now is what kind of management can we implement to mitigate the problem," said Ken Tate, a University of California rangeland watershed specialist who has been advising ranchers on data interpretation and quality control of their monitoring program. Thomas said ranchers have already adopted practices to improve water quality such as installing riparian fencing along the waterways and limiting grazing in those riparian pastures. Other practices Tate suggested include rotational grazing to avoid having high concentrations of cattle lingering near a waterway; using filter strips or wetlands to filter the water; improving irrigation practices so they don't generate as much runoff; and making sure that cattle are out of the field before they irrigate. "All these things can work," Tate said. "It's just a matter of which ones can work on which ranch and what people can do." (Ching Lee is a reporter for Ag Alert. She may be contacted at clee at cfbf.com.) Courtesy the California Farm Bureau From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 27 13:04:18 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:04:18 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Ontario: Stench came from Hamilton biosolids on farm fields Message-ID: http://www.inportdover.com/ssm/m/content/article.php?content_id=265 Stench came from spreading Hamilton's biosolids on fields - Wednesday, August 27, 2008 The unpleasant odour which enveloped this community last Wednesday and Thursday had many residents upset. County of Norfolk Waste Water Compliance Supervisor Bob Fields told The Maple Leaf the smell was from ???refined solids??? that had been applied on agricultural land at the north-east Highway 6 approach to Port Dover. He said that farmers like that material for land application as it is rich in nutrients. In order to be used for that purpose it had been treated to Ontario Ministry of Environment standards. Mr. Fields said he and General Manager Eric D???Hondt of Norfolk???s Public Works and Environmental Services Department had visited the site. The Ministry of the Environment informed The Maple Leaf on Friday the company had ceased the spreading of biosolids at Port Dover. The material spread on the land included human waste from a Hamilton treatment plant. It was brought here in large transports, placed in a spreader pulled by a tractor. A second tractor then pulled a set of farm discs to turn the material into the soil. That activity attracted hundreds of sea gulls to the freshly turned soil. The initial reaction of Port Dover residents to the smell was to blame the wastewater (sewage) treatment plant on the New Lakeshore Road, suggesting it was not operating properly. Fred Rozniak of John Street called The Maple Leaf to complain the strong stench was affecting his wife???s breathing as she is undergoing medical treatments. On Friday, Ontario Ministry of the Environment Supervisor Jane Glassco of the Hamilton District Office replied to The Maple Leaf???s enquiry about where the material had come from, noting, ???The source of the biosolids is Woodward Treatment Plant in Hamilton, Ontario.??? Supervisor Glassco stated, ???The Ministry of the Environment has a very thorough process that is required for each applicant. For example, each applicant must include: waste and soil analysis, description and location of the spreading site. When the information is verified by personnel at the Hamilton District office, a Certificate of Approval is issued for each field where biosolids are spread.??? Concerning the unpleasant odour, Supervisor Glassco stated, ???The Certificate of Approval has a number of conditions that must be adhered to during the application of biosolids. One of the conditions relates to emitting odour during the spreading of biosolids; therefore the company ceased the spreading of biosolids.??? When asked if this incident occurs again, is there a number where citizens of Port Dover call to complain, she replied, Citizens of Norfolk can call the Ministry of the Environment at 1 905 521-7650 between 8:30 and 4:30 p.m. Monday thru Friday and 1 800 268-6060 after business hours and weekends. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 27 23:07:09 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 23:07:09 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Ontario - Rural Signage: "Sludge Free Farm" Message-ID: Week of August 28, 2008 Sludge watch is a sign of the times by Paul Dalby The Independent East Northumberland County may soon be planting a new ?crop? ? roadside signs emblazoned with the message ?Sludge-free farms?. The signs will be the first visible offensive of the newly-formed Concerned Citizens of Northumberland County, formed to battle against human sewage spreading on farm land. ?We?d like to see them erected all over the municipality,? said association president Wendy Deavitt. ?It?s something we?ve got to do in this community.? ?We are looking at purchasing 100 of the signs probably at a cost of between $5 and $7 each,? she said. ?And we will ask every landowner who doesn?t allow sludge spreading to post a sign on their land.? The tactic was successfully adopted in Prince Edward County, where the signs now proliferate. The Concerned Citizens of Northumberland even borrowed Prince Edward?s slogan. ?We wanted to be consistent and use the same message,? Ms. Deavitt, who said she is also inviting Prince Edward County councillor Sandy Latchford to join a delegation to Trent Hills council on Sept. 8. The new Concerned Citizens? Association of Northumberland held its inaugural meeting last week, signed up 50 members and elected a board of directors. Ms. Deavitt says that a primary focus of the new lobby group is to demand accountability from Trent Hills council. ?Definitely keeping an eye on what council is going and making sure they?re accountable for what they?re doing,? she told The Independent. Ms. Deavitt said the new association, whilst focused on biosolids, would be happy to lend its support to other groups facing a serious community issue such as residents opposing a new river bridge in Campbellford. ?We all have our own issues, but I think we need to support each other,? she said. The executive of the new lobby group based in Trent Hills will be: Wendy Deavitt (president), Rob Milligan (vice-president) and directors Elwood Mitchell and Don Dudley. Barbara Pearce will be secretary and Sandra Mitchell will serve as treasurer., Anyone who wants more information should contact: Rob Milligan (705-924-1744), Wendy Deavitt (705-924-3765) or Linda Donaldson (705-653-0769). http://www.eastnorthumberland.com/article.php?id=2323 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 28 13:29:29 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:29:29 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> New Jersey Judge Halts Sludge Capping of Landfill Slated for Housing Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: This story points to several disturbing trends: The use of contaminated soils- sewage sludge and river dredge- to cap landfills and other contaminated sites. The other disturbing trend is the use of sewage on lands slated for housing development. ............................................................................... Judge denies sludge return at EnCap site (by By Corey Klein - August 26, 2008) At a U.S. Bankruptcy Court hearing on Monday, Aug. 25, Judge Novalyn Winfield put off a decision on whether or not to allow the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission to continue bringing processed river dredge and cleaned sewage (sludge) back to the Kingsland and Avon landfills in Lyndhurst. The New Jersey Meadowlands Commission (NJMC) filed the motion to bring the materials onto the site on July 28 to continue the work EnCap started. EnCap debtors, including Wachovia Bank, the township of Lyndhurst, The Trump Organization and EnCap itself opposed the motion. Their opposition was partly due to the ambiguity over where the materials would be placed, the contamination levels of the material and details about the destination of funds generating by placing the materials on the site. By accepting processed dredge material, dug up from the bottom of New York Harbor, and sludge, processed and cleaned by the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission, the NJMC would receive tipping fees. The NJMC wanted the tipping fees to be placed in an escrow account to fund remediation efforts at the site, which have largely stopped since the NJMC essentially kicked EnCap?s managerial successor, the Trump Organization, from the job earlier this year. The NJMC argued that allowing EnCap?s bankruptcy proceedings to delay cleanup efforts is a public health hazard and finishing the work EnCap started should be a priority. While critics have questioned the safety of using dredge and sludge to cap landfills that are poised for future housing, the NJMC maintains that the materials are clean and that the use of the materials had already been agreed to by EnCap, the NJMC and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. http://www.southbergenite.com/NC/0/1636.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 28 13:38:58 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:38:58 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Alternative Energy, Flint Michigan looks at Poop to Power Message-ID: http://jalopnik.com/390083/flint-michigan-looks-to-poop-for-power Flint, Michigan, Looks To Poop For Power The city of Flint, Michigan, is planning to turn human waste into fuel to power vehicles and buildings. Mayor Don Williamson sees sewage as not only a potential fuel source for city vehicles, but as a source of jobs as spinoff businesses grow up around the planned facility. That facility would be implemented by Swedish Biogas International, who has experience converting human waste into biogas, which is a nice word for stinky methane. The project, which still needs funding and approval, could also create fertilizer, turning it into a revenue raiser and could eventually use other sources of waste biomass, such as landfills. Sweden, which is being used as a model for the town's energy plans, gets about 65% of its heating energy from waste biomass. Expect to see many more euphemisms for shit as Flint develops and institutes its plan to turn lemons into disgusting lemonade. [via MLive.com] From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 28 14:03:53 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:03:53 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge Compliants - Hamilton Sludge in Port Dover Ontario Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: There are already 43 convictions of Terratec for sludge related offenses, according to Ministry of Environment legal records. There are, according to this story, 10 more charges before the courts. Why is Hamilton using tax money to pay this repeat offender millions of dollars every year? What data is the regulator using to determine public health impacts from bioaerosols blowing off sludge spread fields? ......................................................................................... Sludge fears and complaints are blowin' in the wind August 28, 2008 Rebecca Penty The Hamilton Spectator Port Dover (Aug 28, 2008) Hamilton sludge spread on farm fields near Port Dover Friday delivered a powerful stench that had politicians questioning the event at county council this week. Strong winds wafted the smell of the biosolids -- treated human waste -- from fields right into town, prompting at least 12 complaints to Councillor John Wells' office. Most hated the odour. Some questioned the sludge's safety. "'Why are we accepting waste from Hamilton?' That is another question people ask," Wells said. Farmers can get sludge -- nutrient-rich human manure -- for free from Hamilton, which avoids sending the waste to landfill. The company that trucks the sludge has 10 charges relating to spills on roadsides and storage of sludge before the courts, but the Ministry of the Environment is satisfied its work last week was legal. Hamilton has paid Terratec Environment Ltd., a subsidiary of Hamilton-based American Water Canada, between $2.5 million and $3 million annually since 1997 to truck sludge to fields mostly in Haldimand and Niagara. Wells raised concerns at Norfolk County council Tuesday night. There's fear sludge carries viruses, bacteria and chemicals that could be taken up by crops or livestock or washed into waterways. "It wasn't human, but it was animal manure that caused Walkerton and all the problems there," Wells said, in reference to the 2000 tainting of drinking water in Walkerton by E. coli from manure. (There was never any confirmation of this - There were no tests of the contaminated water for trace contaminants in order to determine the cause. Admin) The MOE said wind was the only concern in Port Dover last week. Hamilton's ministry supervisor Jane Glassco said stringent guidelines regulate the bacterial and metal content of sludge, which is tested before leaving wastewater treatment plants. Filtered wastewater containing sewage solids is put in big tanks at the Woodward Avenue wastewater treatment plant. Bacteria feed on the organic matter, producing methane gas used for electricity -- about $1 million worth a year. The leftovers are put through centrifuges to spin out water, leaving a semi-solid substance commonly termed sludge. Abdul Khan, Hamilton's director of water and wastewater treatment, said a desire to capture energy from biosolids and uncertainty about health risks are behind plans to stop shipping it. A Biosolids Master Plan has the city looking at incinerating sludge or turning it into gas for energy. For now, the city's neighbours to the south and west may get whiffs of the stuff when winds are right. Port Dover resident Georgina Mummery said she thought the smell last week was pig manure. When she found out it was sludge, she balked. "Where does it go when it goes into the ground?" Mummery said, adding: "I don't think it's a great idea..." rpenty at thespec.com http://www.thespec.com/News/Local/article/426167 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 28 13:57:07 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:57:07 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Drinking Water of 41 Million Americans Contaminated with Pharmaceuticals Message-ID: QUOTE: "Of the 35 watersheds that had been tested, 28 were found to be contaminated. Deep-water aquifers near landfills, feedlots and other contaminant sources in 24 states were also found to contain pharmaceuticals. This means that even in rural areas where people get their water from wells, drinking water might still contain drugs." ============================================ Drinking Water of 41 Million Americans Contaminated with Pharmaceuticals Friday, August 22, 2008 by: David Gutierrez http://www.naturalnews.com/023948.html An investigation by the Associated Press (AP) has revealed that the drinking water of at least 41 million people in the United States is contaminated with pharmaceutical drugs. It has long been known that drugs are not wholly absorbed or broken down by the human body. Significant amounts of any medication taken eventually pass out of the body, primarily through the urine. "People think that if they take a medication, their body absorbs it and it disappears, but of course that's not the case," EPA scientist Christian Daughton said. While sewage is treated before being released back into the environment, and water from reservoirs or rivers is also treated before being funneled back into the drinking water supply, these treatments are not able to remove all traces of medications. And so far, the EPA has not regulated the presence of pharmaceuticals in drinking water, meaning that there are no laws in existence today that protect consumers from this increasingly dangerous chemical contaminant of the water supply. Medications for animals also contaminating the water supply Drugs given to animals are also entering the water supply. One study found that 10 percent of the steroids given to cattle pass directly through their bodies, while another study found that steroid concentrations in the water downstream of a Nebraska feedlot were four times as high as the water upstream. Male fish downstream of the feedlot were found to have depressed levels of testosterone and smaller than normal heads, most likely due to the pharmaceutical contamination in their water. "It brings a question to people's minds that if the fish were affected ... might there be a potential problem for humans?" said EPA research biologist Vickie Wilson. While the concentration of drugs in drinking water tends to be low, some medications, such as hormones, are able to operate potently even at concentrations of one part per billion. To make matters worse, there is evidence that the chlorine commonly used to treat drinking water may make some pharmaceutical chemicals more toxic. Thus, the typical claim that "pharmaceuticals are only present in very low concentrations, and therefore could not be dangerous" holds no water (pardon the pun). Not only are some chemicals potentiated (made more toxic) by other chemicals in the water, but to date, there have been absolutely no studies looking at the increased danger posed by combinations of pharmaceuticals now being found. In other words, nobody knows the level of risk that may be associated with the chemical cocktail of pharmaceuticals now being found in the water supply. No one can say with any degree of honesty that the drug contamination is safe, meaning that the real risks to human remain entirely unknown. 56 different drug chemicals in the drinking water To determine the extent of drinking water contamination, an Associated Press investigative team surveyed the water providers of the 50 largest cities in the United States and 52 smaller communities, analyzed federal databases and scientific reports, and interviewed government and corporate officials. The investigation found widespread evidence of drinking water contaminated with both over-the-counter and prescription drugs, including painkillers, hormones, antibiotics, anti-convulsants, anti-depressants, and drugs for cancer or heart disease. Of the 28 major cities that tested their water supplies for pharmaceuticals, only two said those tests showed no pharmaceutical contamination. In Philadelphia, 56 different drugs and drug byproducts were found in treated drinking water, and 63 were found in the city's watershed. Of the 35 watersheds that had been tested, 28 were found to be contaminated. Deep-water aquifers near landfills, feedlots and other contaminant sources in 24 states were also found to contain pharmaceuticals. This means that even in rural areas where people get their water from wells, drinking water might still contain drugs. According to researcher Anthony Aufdenkampe of the Stroud Water Research Center, watersheds in rural areas can be contaminated when people's septic tanks malfunction. "Septic systems are essentially small treatment plants that are essentially unmanaged and therefore tend to fail," he said. Cities do not test the water for pharmaceutical pollution Even these numbers do not give the full scale of the problem, the AP suggests, because many water providers simply do not test for this kind of contamination, which is not regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Of the 52 small water providers surveyed by AP, only one screened its water for pharmaceuticals. Other providers do screen, but they conceal the results from the public. According to a group that represents California water providers, the public "doesn't know how to interpret the information" from such tests and therefore does not need to hear it! Even companies that test and report their data often screen for only a few chemicals, creating a skewed impression of how contaminated the water actually is. Water bottling companies also do not screen for pharmaceutical contamination in their water products. It is highly likely, at the same time, that soft drink bottling companies using local tap water supplies to make their beverages are potentially using pharmaceutical-contaminated water. The EPA sticks its head in the ground over pharmaceutical pollution According to Shane Snyder, research and development project manager at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, researchers looking into the extent of water contamination are avoiding the important questions. "I think it's a shame that so much money is going into monitoring to figure out if these things are out there, and so little is being spent on human health," Snyder said. "They need to just accept that these things are everywhere; every chemical and pharmaceutical could be there. It's time for the EPA to step up to the plate and make a statement about the need to study effects, both human and environmental." A total of over 100 pharmaceutical products have been detected in water supplies in North America, Europe and Asia, including remote regions such as Swiss lakes and the North Sea. And bottled or filtered water, the AP report notes, is not necessarily safer, as the filters used in homes or bottling plants are rarely designed to remove pharmaceutical residue. Drug companies, for their part, have done nothing to accept responsibility for the environmental health impact of their polluting chemicals. In fact, Big Pharma hasn't even yet acknowledged the fact that their products are "pollutants" in any way. Like most pharmaceutical consumers, the drug companies hope to just flush this issue down the toilet and pretend it never existed. The health impact of pharmaceutical contaminants in water Very little research has been conducted on the specific effects of trace drugs in drinking water, but what evidence is there gives cause for alarm. Contamination of environmental water sources has caused male fish to exhibit female traits and led to damaging effects on other wildlife species. Laboratory research indicates that small levels of drugs can cause cancer cells to proliferate faster, slow kidney cell growth and cause inflammation in blood cells. At a time when the American population is suffering from skyrocketing infertility and hormone imbalances, it seems outrageous that health authorities would not be looking more closely at this issue and working on ways to protect the public from pharmaceutical pollution. Because water is consumed regularly in large quantities over a lifetime, and because humans are exposed to many combinations of dozens of different drugs, the effects on the human body may be significantly greater than those seen in the lab. And unlike most pollutants, drugs are specifically designed to cause changes in the human body, thus they are far less likely to be "inert" than other chemicals that might be found in the water supply. "These are chemicals that are designed to have very specific effects at very low concentrations," said zoologist John Sumpter of London's Brunel University. "That's what pharmaceuticals do. So when they get out to the environment, it should not be a shock to people that they have effects." From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 28 14:35:03 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 14:35:03 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge Story on YouTube: Wendy Deavitt on the Garth Riley Show Message-ID: This is part one of a TV show that ran last month on CHEX TV in Ontario, Canada It is a Garth Riley interview with Wendy Deavitt and Rob Milligan about the agricultural use of sewage sludge...a 10 minute segment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YF3ZQmC5cE The rest of the show will be mounted on the internet shortly. You are connected to Garth Riley: Host of First Take Live on Channel 12 CHEX TV Durham and Channel 129 on Rogers Digital Cable anywhere in Ontario Watch Monday-Tuesday Nights 6:30 pm-7:30pm Great Guests Every Show! From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 29 00:14:49 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:14:49 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Romoland Calif - cutting edge of sludge and other waste to energy Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin Los Angeles has investigated hundreds of conversion technologies to address their waste issues. "A study is under way to determine if a pyrolysis system built by International Environmental Solutions could be located at Norco's sewage treatment plant, and also power it, thereby saving the city $1 million, Mayor Frank Hall said. The study should be completed in the next two months, he said." ............................................ http://socalconversion.org/pdfs/Press%20Enterprise%20-%206-10-2008.pdf Romoland plant on cutting edge of turning trash into electricity Romoland plant on cutting edge of turning trash into electricity Tuesday, June 10, 2008 By JENNIFER BOWLES The Press-Enterprise Video: Inland company converts waste to energy On a corner in Romoland not far from the bustle of Interstate 215, a rag-tag crew has assembled from theground up a plant that observers say will be the nation's first working example of an oxygen-deprived technology that turns trash into electricity. Crew members have used motors from a power plant they helped disassembled on an Indian reservation, bought boilers from an old factory in Riverside, and pulled underground tanks found at the site to forge a maze of cylinders, scrubbers and a conveyer belt. "We bought a lot of stuff we could get from salvage to build this plant so we could afford it," said Karen Bertram, president of International Environmental Solutions Corp. "We actually recycled a lot of stuff." Essentially, the "pyrolysis" system decomposes trash at high temperatures without oxygen and turns it intocarbon char residue. That process releases gas that generates heat, which then creates steam to power turbines that generate electricity. Although regulatory hurdles remain, many experts and observers agree the technology being developed by the company on 8.5 acres in the town north of Temecula holds promise. The idea would be to then build largerplants elsewhere, Bertram said. During a recent tour of the operation, Bertram gestured toward to a pile of shredded waste about to be swallowed by the humming machinery. "If you put diapers in a landfill, it takes five years to degrade," she said. "We do it in 20 minutes." At the end of the process, the machinery coughs out pellets of charred carbon -- what's left of the diapers and the rest of the trash. "We believe in reduce, recycle and reuse -- and then this," Bertram said. "There's no such thing as zero waste, but we can reserve the energy of what's left." Once turbines are installed at the site, there will be enough electricity coming from the heat-generated steam to start producing electricity, Bertram said. Looking for Success The technology being developed by International Environmental Solution has caught the attention of officials in Los Angeles County. Officials there are looking for remedies for diminishing landfill space and the need to transport trash elsewhere, said Coby Skye, an associate civil engineer for the Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County. The county evaluated hundreds of companies that use various technologies to get rid of trash before narrowing the field to four -- including Bertram's company. "As we have less capacity for landfill disposal and energy costs rise, these technologies increase in value, and makes these much more economically valuable," he said. Skye said a number of factors put International Environmental Solutions on the short list. The technology has been tested on municipal solid waste, and the company had solid data on emissions and the amount of energy that can be generated, he said. "They had to meet very stringent criteria in terms of their environmental performance and economic stability in order for them to make the cut," he said. The county has an Aug. 15 deadline for those four companies to submit a site-specific proposal in Southern California, Skye said. Bertram said her proposal will involve the Robert A. Nelson Transfer Station in Riverside, where her company would build a pilot pyrolysis operation. Besides Los Angeles County, officials in Riverside County and as far away as Turkey are keeping on an eye on the company's progress as it navigates the permit process in a region known for stringent air-quality rules. Other companies using the same technology have built plants in Japan and Europe. "If you can build it here in the South Coast Air Quality Management District, you can probably build it anywhere," said Hans Kernkamp, general manager and chief engineer for Riverside County's Waste Management Department. Kernkamp said Riverside County had initial talks of using a waste-to-energy technology at the Edom Hilltransfer station, east of Desert Hot Springs. Bertram's company was on the short list until the project fell by the wayside, he said. Although Kernkamp thinks the technology needs to be proved on a larger scale, he said he hopes Bertram's company gets chosen by Los Angeles County. "They're the home team ... and we'd like to see them be successful," he said. An Experiment The eight people who work at International Environmental Solutions are led by Bertram, formerly a corporate attorney in Texas who now drives her hybrid Toyota Prius from Orange County to Romoland. Work started in 1999, but with a different purpose: to reactivate carbon so it could be used again to rid water of certain chemicals. Bertram turned to the trash business after a large competitor built a carbon-reactivation plant and cornered the market, she said. It began a few years ago, she said, when folks from the California Integrated Waste Management Board and UC Riverside's Bourns College of Engineering asked Bertram to consider converting the reactivated carbon system it into a pyrolytic conversion plant because they wanted to see how well it would work. Plus, Bertram realized how many landfills were about to close and how the system could produce renewable energy. "We did it and we found out we did it well. But I didn't think it would be this big," she said, noting that the process can take care of not only typical household trash, but also medical waste, tires, horse manure and hazardous waste. Along with Bertram are a father-son team, Cameron and Toby Cole, who have backgrounds in fabrication. While engineers have consulted on the facility, there are no Ph.D.s, Bertram said. "We're like wildcatters," Bertram said. Big Need, Small Steps Folks from horse-friendly Norco took a tour of the Romoland plant recently to see if the process could be used to turn the town's ample supply of manure into carbon char. A study is under way to determine if a pyrolysis system built by International Environmental Solutions could be located at Norco's sewage treatment plant, and also power it, thereby saving the city $1 million, Mayor Frank Hall said. The study should be completed in the next two months, he said. Both Kernkamp and Skye said the so-called waste conversion technologies such as pyrolysis have a drawback in that the state wouldn't give cities credit for keeping the trash out of landfills. State law requires cities to keep 50 percent of trash from ending up in landfills, and most of it is done through recycling. Fernando Berton, manager of research and applied technology for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, said that's the way the law was written. Kernkamp said the volume of waste now being processed by the pyrolysis system is minimal compared to what's taken into the Nelson transfer station. "A pilot facility would take 100 tons a day," he said, while the transfer station now processes 3,000 tons a day. "Before we start talking about this being a substitute, we've got a long way to go," Kernkamp said. "But we have to take these steps." Reach Jennifer Bowles at 951-368-9548 or jbowles at PE.com. Or check out her blog at www.pe.com/blogs/environment From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 29 15:11:33 2008 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:11:33 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Rose George - The Guardian - UK - Is sludge use on farms prudent? Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Rose George interviewed many people for her book on sludge. It is surprising that she still doesn't understand the pathogen risks of sludge...here she forgets that while raw sewage can contain over 50 kinds of pathogens...so called 'treated' sludge can also contain 50 kinds of pathogens. .............................................. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/29/waste.recycling Too good to waste? Reports that sludge from sewage plants is routinely used to fertilise edible crops have caused outrage. Is this simply a prudent use of so-called 'biosolids' or a grave threat to our health? Rose George investigates Rose George The Guardian, Friday August 29 2008 It is my first and last day at sewage school. The premises are nothing much to look at, consisting of a Portakabin in the car park of Barston, a small sewage-treatment works near Birmingham. This classroom is one of five run by Severn Trent, one of the 10 utilities that supply clean drinking water and remove dirty water for the people of England and Wales. The education programme is fully funded by the utility in an attempt to reveal its vital job to a public that doesn't pay it mind. They think it's a good investment. Today's class comes from a nearby primary school. After a brief trot through the water cycle and some green lessons - washing a car with a hosepipe uses nine litres of water a minute, children, so use buckets - the sewage pupils put on their wellies for the tour. First, the influent, brown water rushing in from the sewers, visible through a hole in the ground. Then the compactor that crunches up objects screened by grills. It's not moving, sir, they say, but it is, spitting out in slow-motion rags and pen caps and hundreds of the yellow sweetcorn kernels that humans can't digest, prized by picnicking birds. Wastewater treatment is much-tinkered-with - 1,000 works will have 999 different processes, a worker tells me - but the basics are unchangeable. Solids are removed from sewage first by filtering and letting them sink. This is primary treatment. Secondary treatment involves micro-organisms, bolstered by added oxygen, that break down any organic content still in the wastewater. The bacteria-cleaned effluent goes into a nearby stream. The children lean over obediently to look at its colour. It's clear! Not brown! And then it's time to make sewage soup. It has been a long time since sewage consisted of pure human faecal material. Into sewage, anything goes. An enterprising American sewage-treatment manager once expressed this by producing water bottles supposedly made from sewage effluent. Their labels listed the ingredients: water, faecal matter, toilet paper, hair, lint, rancid grease, stomach acid and trace amounts of Pepto Bismol, chocolate, urine, body oils, dead skin, industrial chemicals (aluminium, copper, zinc, lead, chromium, nickel, molybdenum, selenium, silver, arsenic, mercury) ammonia, soil, laundry soap, bath soap, shaving cream, sweat, saliva, salt, sugar. So the ingredients of sewage soup are a tankful of water and whatever else the class might have put down the sink, toilet, gutter or drain that day. The children suggest shampoo, soap, toothpaste, washing powder, rice and salt, which the teacher adds into a tankful of water. "Number one" is lime cordial. "Number two" is soggy Weetabix. The rest of the lesson involves filtering the filth out of the water, in an attempt to impart the difficulty - and dubious sanity - of the paradigm of waterborne waste treatment in modern industrialised societies, whereby you take clean drinking water, throw filth into it, then spend millions to clean it again. My team gets a passable liquid from the filtering. They are pleased. But no one has considered the stuff that's been filtered. No one mentions the sludge. When sewage is cleaned and treated, the dirt that is removed is called sewage sludge. The UK produces 1.44m tonnes of it a year, and it has to go somewhere. The most common options consist of incineration, landfill, application to farmland and dumping at sea. The EU banned ocean dumping in 1998, as the nutrients in human waste - nitrogen and phosphorous, for a start - can, in great quantities, suffocate the life from water. The public doesn't much like incineration, and landfill space is running out. So 68% of our sludge is applied to fields, a fact that translated into newspaper headlines last month as "human sewage [is] used for our cereals," beside a photograph of a woman eating cornflakes. Reader reaction was predictable. One commenter swore never to shop at supermarkets again. Another pronounced the practice "disgusting". But on the forum of Farmers Weekly, the farmers let rip. "It's great stuff," wrote one, "and probably better than the raw cow muck that goes on." The public's horror was yet another reason that "the general public, and the media, should not be allowed out on farms ... without serious education beforehand". In fact, sludge used as fertiliser isn't news. Nor is it going away, given the rising price of artificial fertilisers. Severn Trent reports a 25% increase in demand from farmers since January. Anglian Water has a waiting list. And why not? Sludge contains nitrogen and phosphorous, which farmers and crops love. It's often given away free, and it saves farmers about ??450 per hectare that they would otherwise spend on fertiliser. Water UK, an association of the water utilities, reckons 3,000 farmers - out of 146,000 in total - use sludge each year, applying it to all kinds of arable land. Nor is it unusual. Human waste has been used to fertilise fields for thousands of years. China's willingness to use untreated sewage on its fields is probably the reason its soil is still fertile after 4,000 years of cultivation, when other civilisations such as the Maya watched their crops wither and their soil erode. A recent report by the International Water Management Institute calculated that 200 million farmers worldwide were using raw sewage to irrigate their crops. Properly treated, sewage could have a place in the nutrient cycle. Food feeds humans whose waste feeds food. And sludge is not raw sewage, which can carry at least 50 communicable diseases. It is treated and regulated (the better stuff has to have 99.9999% of pathogens, including salmonella, removed; the lower-quality sludge has to have 99%). Heavy metals are also regulated, as are harvesting and sowing times (farmers must wait 30 months before sowing vegetables after using lower-quality sludge, for example). In principle, it makes perfect sense. The British government considers sludge as fertiliser "the best practicable environmental option". Steve Ntifo of Water UK is convinced that sludge is safe "subject to regulation". But in the US, where 3m tonnes of sludge are applied to farmland, an increasingly vocal anti-sludge movement doesn't agree. Though sludge has been rebranded "biosolids" (after a naming competition that also produced "bioslurp" and "black gold"), the debate over its use has become controversial and bitter. It has involved lawsuits, high politics, secret settlements and scores of allegations of illness. Some of those allegations have come from a quiet corner of South Carolina, from a picture-postcard small white bungalow opposite unremarkable brown fields. The house is owned by Nancy Holt, a retired nurse, whose family have farmed in this area for 250 years. The fields, Holt thinks, are killing her. I visited Holt on a hot August day last year. She greeted me with a hug and a cold flannel for my head, then sat me down at the kitchen table and prepared the weapons of the grassroots protester: piles of files, dossiers, reports and a scientific vocabulary that she has accumulated along with frustration and disbelief. The year before, she told me, sludge was applied for 33 days straight to the fields. "Based on the number of 6,000-gallon tankers that came to apply it, we came up with the best guess that 9.75m gallons [were] spread on 160 acres. They were doing it 12 hours a day and a truck would arrive every 10 minutes." That was when Holt went blind. She wasn't a well woman to begin with. When I'd called to make the appointment, she'd apologised for misunderstanding something by saying, "I have holes in my head." I took it as a joke, but she does have holes in her head, after surgery which left her with metal clamps in her brain. One time when the sludge was applied - it's been arriving twice a year, spring and summer, for 13 years - the arteries in her brain swelled, pressed on her optic nerve and temporarily took away her sight. The diagnosis was the blood-vessel disorder, giant cell arteritis, but no cause was proven. Holt is sure the cause was the sludge, and she now spends much of her life trying to prove it. The trouble began in the creeks. In 2001, Holt's grandson and great-nephew were diagnosed with staphylococcus aureus ("staph"), a bacterial infection usually associated with dirty hospitals, and most famous for its antibiotic-resistant superbug strain MRSA. She noticed that they fell sick after playing in the streams running behind the house. Then a local dog fell ill to flesh-eating bacteria. Then someone organised a fundraiser for a couple who both had cancer, and people started taking a tally of incidents. The Cook family: three daughters with breast cancer. The Hoffmans: a mother with colon cancer, a father with prostate cancer and a 13-year-old son with testicular cancer. Five cases of brain cancer in a community of 38 families. Holt started to keep records. She made a list of health problems associated with exposure to applied sludge that included "increased respiratory distress or breathing difficulties; diarrhoea (chronic during sludge applications, all ages); chronic and acute headaches (persistent after exposure to odours, relieved by leaving residence); staph infections (children covered by staph sores after playing in creeks or streams after significant rains); presumed neurotoxin sensitivity (seizures, nausea, elevated blood pressure, and rash)." In this, she wasn't alone. Another sludge activist called Helane Shields had compiled a dossier of complaints 500 pages thick. The Waste Management Institute at Cornell University, directed by Professor Ellen Harrison, has gathered 350 sludge-related health complaints, and lists characteristic symptoms as: asthma, flu-like symptoms, eye irritations, lesions, immuno-deficiency, nosebleeds, burning eyes, throat or nose. Nancy began to read the literature, including news stories about the work of Dr Tyrone Hayes, who found that frogs were being deformed by mixtures of pesticides, even when individual pesticides were well within legal limits. She handed me articles about the transmission of prions - infectious agents linked to BSE - from funeral-home waste, and about outbreaks of e-coli in Californian spinach. She talked at top speed about antibiotics in the sewage, and how only the strongest and fittest survive and that if we wanted to create superbugs, we couldn't do better. She didn't let up for two hours, and by the end was still running on indignation. People who promote and supply biosolids, depending on how courteous they are, tend to dismiss opponents such as Holt as anything from over-emotive to hysterical. Cranks. Nimbyists. The problem, they say, is about smell, not science. Humans have learned to avoid what is dangerous, and faeces can be lethal. Faecal aversion, one wastewater treatment manager told me, is clouding risk perception. He showed me a bottle of vitamins which contained the heavy metal selenium. "You'd have to eat 212 pounds of our biosolids to get what your body needs." But criticism of sludge has come from quarters that no one could call over-emotive. Robert Swank, a senior Environmental Protection Agency official, testified to the US Senate in 2000 that US regulations "don't pass scientific muster". In 2002, a senior EPA microbiologist called Dr David Lewis led a University of Georgia study that analysed 53 incidents where health issues had been reported near sludge sites, and found a puzzlingly high incidence of staph infections. Lewis thought chemical irritants in sludge may be causing lesions that allowed staph easy access to the bloodstream. He told reporters: "In my opinion, the land-spreading of sludge is a serious problem. We have mixed together pathogens with a wide variety of chemicals that are known to enhance the infection process. It makes people more susceptible to infections." Taking excrement from hundreds of thousands of people, mixing it and spreading it on land is simply "not a good idea". Not long afterwards, he was fired. The Harper-Collins Dictionary of Environmental Science defines sludge as "a viscous, semi-solid mixture of bacteria and virus-laden organic matter, toxic metals, synthetic organic chemicals and settled solids removed from domestic industrial wastewater at a sewage-treatment plant". The Clean Water Act keeps it simple and calls it a pollutant. Critics don't just object to possible risks to human health: Ellen Harrison of Cornell University, a soil scientist by training, also worries about the health of soil. In a paper entitled "The Case for Caution", she pointed out that "lead used by Romans persists in the soil two millennia later". Of course soil science is extremely complex, and long-term tests run by Defra looking at metals in sludge-applied land have found no cause for concern. Even so, Switzerland - which used to land-apply 40% of its sludge - has banned the practice because of fears from farmers that it was harming their soil. The Netherlands has banned agricultural use of sludge, and national farmers' associations in France, Germany, Sweden, Luxembourg and Finland are against it, partly because of concerns about organic contaminants such as PCBs and brominated flame retardants (linked to liver and neurodevelopmental toxicity and hormone disruption), which some research has shown persist in sludge. Food retailers Del Monte, Kraft and Heinz won't accept produce grown on sludge-fertilised fields. EU organic regulations - which are followed by all UK organic certification bodies - won't allow it, even though the principle of closing the nutrient cycle is one that is dear to organic hearts. Ntifo attributes the Swiss ban to "a powerful incineration lobby". Opposition from food retailers, meanwhile, is about "a perception of perceptions". Food retailers worry what their customers think. "They are calculating their commercial risk. It's not about the science." Water UK states that "there has never been a recorded outbreak of human ill health in the UK as a result of the practice of recycling biosolids to land." I don't know who is right. But I see the certainty of the sludge industry, and I think of a different century when engineering and science began to have inordinate confidence, which was expressed by Sir Joseph Bazalgette during an 1870 inquiry into the pollution of the Thames. The vicar of Barking and 123 of his neighbours had objected to Bazalgette's practice of discharging all London's sewage into the river. Bazalgette, called to the inquiry, showed himself to be as sure of himself as the biosolids promoters of today. The possibility that the river was being polluted was, he asserted, "entirely imaginary and contrary to the fact". Eight years later, the Princess Alice steamboat collided with a dredger near the outfall, and more than 600 people died. Survivors reported that they could not swim in such noxious waters, and that they vomited copiously. The outfalls were closed 20 years later. It is not recorded whether Bazalgette ever admitted he had been wrong. PCBs were considered safe for decades. So was DDT. In the US, the most authoritative document on sludge is still a 2002 report by the National Academy of Sciences, which concluded that "there is no documented scientific evidence that the Part 503 rules [which govern biosolids use] have failed to protect public health". But opponents quote the following sentence instead because it reads: "However, additional scientific work is needed to reduce persistent uncertainty about the potential for adverse human health effects from exposure to biosolids." The sentences are quoted endlessly because, in Harrison's view, "there is a dearth of investigation in this area". Those two sentences are the scraps that each side fights the other over. In between, there is space for speculation and fear. In the US, the fate of the biosolids industry may be decided by lawyers. Though three deaths of young men allegedly from sludge-linked staph infections didn't reach court (one was settled by Synagro, a sludge-applying giant now owned by the Carlyle Group), those of cows have. In 2006, a Georgia court awarded damages to a dairy farmer when 30% of his cattle died after eating sludge-applied hay, 10 times the normal mortality rate. An Associated Press investigation found that levels of thallium - a metal that can cause nerve damage - in the herd's milk were 120 times those allowed in drinking water (and that the milk was still sold for human consumption). This year, Judge Anthony Alaimo of Georgia found that another dairy farm had been acutely contaminated by sludge. Scientific data supplied by the municipality of Augusta that claimed to prove the safety of biosolids was, the judge declared, "unreliable, incomplete and in some cases fudged". Are biosolids safe? "I am always hesitant to answer that," says Eric Davis, the land application manager for Burlington, North Carolina, which supplies the biosolids that are spread on the fields near Holt, "because safe means something to some folks and something else to others. That doesn't mean we're trying to hide anything. If safety means compliance with the letter of the law, then our biosolids are safe. There are a finite number of constituents we can test for: outside those, you're in the realm of unknowns. We're always trying to figure out the next step. We're willing to change as technology changes." This wouldn't comfort the lone voice of opposition on the Farmers Weekly forum. Though in the minority, he was forthright. "I won't have sludge on my land. The heavy metals just sit in the plough layer waiting until someone realises there are long-term problems for animals, crops and us. I honestly believe that all those who [use sludge] will live to regret it." ??? Rose George is the author of The Big Necessity: Adventures in the World of Human Waste, published by Portobello Books on Monday priced ??12.99