From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 1 11:05:41 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 11:05:41 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> EPA - stops sludge use on Doe Run mine waste in Missouri Lead Belt Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: On contaminated sites often sludge application is allowed at massive application rates...and as below...causes environmental contamination that compounds the original contamination. .................................................. Friday, July 31, 2009 EPA cracks down on Doe Run cleanup St. Louis Business Journal The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has imposed tougher requirements on Doe Run Resources Corp.?s cleanup of a mine waste site in Leadwood, Mo., where residents complained of animal bones and slow progress. The new terms, contained in an administrative order issued Friday in Kansas City, Kan., are meant to address public concerns including the proper use of treated sewage sludge to remediate the site, the EPA said. The EPA ordered Doe Run to stop applying sludge, or biosolids, and imposed specific deadlines for the company to control runoff to nearby houses (September 2009), remove earth (September 2010) and complete rock and soil cover, vegetative seeding, fertilization and treatment ponds (May 2011). The EPA said that when Doe Run is again given the go-ahead to apply the sludge, the company must give the EPA and Leadwood?s mayor a five-day notice and apply the material only during the day. ?Doe Run has been working under a plan developed by Doe Run engineers and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency to help improve and remediate the nearly 100-year-old Leadwood mine tailing site,? John Carter, Doe Run's manager of mining properties, said in a statement Friday. ?Yesterday, we talked with the EPA to collaborate and identify several solutions to address the concerns of the local community. Today, the EPA is formalizing our agreement so that we can move forward. These are additions to what we?re already successfully doing at the Leadwood site ... We?re committed to continuous improvement, and helping the community." Residents had contacted environmental investigator Erin Brockovich about the site, according to media reports. EPA Region 7 has scheduled a public meeting to discuss the terms of its order. The meeting is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. at the West County High School Cafeteria, 768 Highway M, in Park Hills, Mo. Led by President and Chief Executive A. Bruce Neil, Doe Run is a privately held natural resources company and the largest integrated lead producer in the Western Hemisphere. Doe Run has operations in Missouri, Washington and Arizona. The Leadwood Mine Tailings Superfund Site is one of six major mine waste areas located in a region of Missouri known as the Old Lead Belt. Historical mining activities were conducted in the region for the greater part of 70 years, leaving behind elevated levels of lead and zinc that pose threats to human health and the environment, the EPA said. http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2009/07/27/daily73.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 09:50:21 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:50:21 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Buffalo: sludge pellets become a costly nightmare In-Reply-To: <98420F78BF228648A3F6C7DE89D1644D08F483FB@tmg-mail1.torstar.net> References: <98420F78BF228648A3F6C7DE89D1644D08F483FB@tmg-mail1.torstar.net> Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Cities around North America have been sold a fool's fable: that they can pelletize sewage sludge and make money from selling it. The pellets make contaminated and poor quality fertilize. They tend to go into spontaneous combustion and are therefore difficult to store. The cost to dry the sludge into pellets is huge: the fuel bill alone is around $125 per ton of wet sludge. There is no market for the finished pellets. The equipment is subject to fires (often catastrophic fires, like Toronto and Windsor, and Milwaukee). And the production is uncertain. Like the Buffalo plant, Toronto's Veolia pelletizer works one day and is shut down the next...so the City doesn't know how much sludge it has to truck away from one day to the next...therefore can't plan or contract for services in a business-like way. And taxpayers are being bilked bigtime: $400 per ton to make some sludge pellets that no one wants...no one will pay $1 per ton to buy. Toronto taxpayers are paying $30 per ton to Veolia to truck the pellets away somewhere. ...................................... http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregion/story/751681.html Green dream becomes a costly nightmare in Amherst Pelletization of Amherst sewage isn?t bargain, boon By Sandra Tan NEWS STAFF REPORTER August 02, 2009 What started out in 1996 as a system that could turn sewage into money for Amherst has become an expensive maintenance nightmare that may be reaching the end of its troubled life. A grant is providing new incentive to dismantle the town?s $8 million pelletization system, designed to convert sewer sludge into marketable fertilizer. Few programs have cost Amherst as much money or embarrassment. >From the very beginning, the plant created more drama than revenue. More than 900 tons of pellets, which resemble smelly peppercorns, were thrown away last year alone, according to town data. ?How far do we keep investing dollars into a product that we aren?t successful in marketing out?? said Council Member Guy Marlette, board liaison to the town?s Solid Waste Committee. ?At some point we have to face the reality the whole program is not providing us what our intention was.? In a go-green era promoting recycling and reuse, the pelletization program would seem to have a brighter future ahead ? but the opposite is true. Amherst received a major grant last month that would cover the capital costs associated with trucking town sludge to the Buffalo Sewer Authority for incineration and shutting down the town?s pellet operation. Town officials estimate a net savings of more than $1 million a year through this arrangement with Buffalo. They also say that while it is possible to sell most of the town?s pellets to a Virginia Beach-based fertilizer producer, it would be far cheaper in the long run to truck town sludge to the city. ?It, to me, does not make much sense to continue to pelletize,? said Jeffrey Angiel, the town?s assistant municipal engineer. He and other former town engineers also said it would be wrong to call the pellet program a failure. Because the pelleting process removes most of the moisture from the town?s sewer sludge, the product is far cheaper to landfill. Over the past few years, pelletization has saved the town between $800,000 and $1 million a year in skyrocketing landfill costs. That amount is roughly equal to or greater than the annual amount to run the pellet program, according to a breakdown of data from the Wastewater Treatment Plant. But the Town of Amherst never made back its original, multimillion-dollar investment, and few deny the project is a failure in terms of expectations. Instead of producing $400,000 in revenue each year, as originally hoped, ?AmEarth? pellets have brought in less than $100,000 during the past five years combined, and less than $1,000 so far this year because of system breakdowns. The possibilities seemed much greater when the equipment was installed 13 years ago. Following in the footsteps of larger cities like Milwaukee, big plans blossomed to produce different AmEarth products by combining the pellets with material from the town?s compost facility and selling the product locally and nationally. Supervisor Satish Mohan said that while hindsight is 20/20, the system was based on technologically sound principles at the time. But glitches in the pellet-producing process surfaced right away. There were odor problems. Foaming problems. Digester and capacity problems. The town spent millions on consultants to try and get the project working, and more money in legal fees when half a dozen suits and countersuits erupted as all sides tried to reassign blame for who was responsible for the stinking mess. While the pellet program is an $8 million system by town calculations, it?s roughly double that by Buffalo News calculations, after adding in bond interest, annual maintenance costs and associated consulting and legal fees over the years. One consultant, Elma-based Micro-Link, still has an unresolved suit against the town for roughly $300,000. Legal expenses associated with the firing of former plant superintendent Anthony Canna in 2003 cost town taxpayers a record $1.2 million and generated 22,000 pages of transcripts before the State Court of Appeals ended matters by refusing to hear his case in January. The aging pelletization system now breaks down monthly, Angiel said. He also estimated the machinery could cost more than $2 million to overhaul. ?If the plant is going to keep it running, we?re going to have to sink some serious capital improvements into the system,? he said. Meanwhile, the Buffalo Sewer Authority has upgraded its incinerators and has more than enough capacity to handle all of Amherst?s sludge. The state awarded a $414,615 grant to the Sewer Authority and the town. Amherst would spend its half of the money decommissioning its pelletization system and purchasing a truck and trailer to transport sludge cakes produced by the town?s Wastewater Treatment Plant to the city for incineration. Marlette acknowledged that after the huge investments the town has made in keeping the pelletization program going, it?s hard for some to consider abandoning it now, especially when the potential for marketing the fertilizer still exists. The Virginia-based fertilizer producer Nutrients Plus has wanted to buy up, transport and market most of the town?s pellets since 2005. But previous boards have refused to approve a contract with the company ? even though the town would see a modest net profit?because the town would need to purchase insurance to cover environmental product liabilities associated with the transport and use of the pellets. The insurance issue is expected to resurface soon for board consideration. Without a contract or guaranteed supply of pellets, Nutrients Plus has been allowed to truck away tons of town pellets for free. Marlette said the town would not completely abandon its environmental principles by having the pellets incinerated. The Buffalo Sewer Authority would capture the methane gas produced in the incineration process and use it to help power its operation, he said. Town officials await a consultant?s recommendation, due in three months, regarding whether it would be smarter financially to enter into an arrangement with Buffalo. ?If it proves there are savings for the town, Solid Waste would probably endorse that maneuver,? Marlette said. ?Until we get that final report, until we get that analysis, there?s no decision one way or another.? stan at buffnews.com From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 10:00:55 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:00:55 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Prions Are Secreted in Milk from Clinically Normal Scrapie-Exposed Sheep Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: This is alarming....they found prions in the milk of scrapie exposed sheep even though the sheep tested negative for scrapie. In Ontario, scrapie infected tissues that were inadequately disinfected were released for a period of months into the Ottawa sewage treatment plant. The sludge with the scrapie tissues was applied on farmland. The City of Ottawa failed to inform the Federal Animal Disease Research Institute of their sewage sludge land application program, and none of the farmers receiving the scrapie sludge were contacted or informed. ...................... Journal of Virology, August 2009, p. 8293-8296, Vol. 83, No. 16 0022-538X/09/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.00051-09 Copyright ? 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved. Prions Are Secreted in Milk from Clinically Normal Scrapie-Exposed Sheep B. C. Maddison,1 C. A. Baker,1 H. C. Rees,2 L. A. Terry,3 L. Thorne,3 S. J. Bellworthy,3 G. C. Whitelam,2 and K. C. Gough4* ADAS UK, Department of Biology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom,1 Department of Biology, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom,2 Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Woodham Lane, New Haw, Addlestone, Surrey KT15 3NB, United Kingdom,3 School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, The University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, College Road, Sutton Bonington, Leicestershire LE12 5RD, United Kingdom4 Received 9 January 2009/ Accepted 27 May 2009 The potential spread of prion infectivity in secreta is a crucial concern for prion disease transmission. Here, serial protein misfolding cyclic amplification (sPMCA) allowed the detection of prions in milk from clinically affected animals as well as scrapie-exposed sheep at least 20 months before clinical onset of disease, irrespective of the immunohistochemical detection of protease-resistant PrPSc within lymphoreticular and central nervous system tissues. These data indicate the secretion of prions within milk during the early stages of disease progression and a role for milk in prion transmission. Furthermore, the application of sPMCA to milk samples offers a noninvasive methodology to detect scrapie during preclinical/subclinical disease. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Corresponding author. Mailing address: School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, The University of Nottingham, Sutton Bonington Campus, College Road, Sutton Bonington, Leicestershire LE12 5RD, United Kingdom. Phone: 44-115-9516272. Fax: 44-115-9516440. E-mail: kevin.gough at nottingham.ac.uk Published ahead of print on 3 June 2009. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////// http://www.mad-cow.org/00/jan01_early_news.html#ggg Canada spreads scrapie sludge Thu, 04 Jan 2001 By A.J. BLAUER, Ottawa Sun The grass might be greener on the other side of the fence, but how safe is that crud it's growing in? An environmental researcher is questioning the practice of spreading municipal "biosolids" on agricultural land after some diseased sheep tissue found its way into the local mix. "Biosolids is just a designed name to make the mind go numb," said Maureen Reilly, founder of Sludge Watch. "We're really turning our farms into landfills." Between February and July 2000, tissues and fluids infected with scrapie, the sheep equivalent of Mad Cow Disease, were released into Ottawa's sewage treatment stream after being disinfected at a lower-than-ideal temperature by the Animal Disease Research Institute (ADRI) on Fallowfield Rd. The sewage was then "stabilized" by the region's wastewater treatment plant and some of it spread on local farmland as a cheap source of nitrogen and other nutrients. Dave Robertson, manager of the region's wastewater treatment branch at the time, said an investigation raised no contamination concerns. About 1,000 metric tonnes of water-separated sludge was spread over 125 hectares of local farm land during the period in question. According to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, the diseased material would have been rendered 99.9999% sterile [based on what study? -- webmaster] when the ADRI inadvertently "cooked" it 13 degrees cooler than the target temperature of 134C. "There's no 100% guarantee -- scientists won't go there -- but we don't believe there's a problem," said CFIA spokesman Andrew Adams. But that incident doesn't put an end to the controversy of using sewage for fertilizer. Even after treatment, Ottawa's spreadable biosolids contain some viruses, bacteria and toxins. Better cleaning equipment would cost $50 million, plus millions more in operating costs. But even in its current form, some argue that biosolid spreading saves the city money and provides a free source of soil nutrient for cash-strapped farmers. Paul Cooper, a director at the Ottawa-Carleton Regional Federation of Agriculture, said there's no evidence of health problems after seven years of biosolid spreading in the region. A public meeting on the issue is slated for Jan. 16 at the Manotick Legion Hall. Comment (Maureen Reilly): "Here's what happened: The Animal Disease Research Institute in Ottawa Ontario is researching a live test for scrapie and is waiting for the sheep in their pen to show signs of scrapie then killing and performing disection. There were 6 infected sheep in the 5 month period. It is not certain to me how much of the infected blood and tissue was placed in the autoclave and treated at suboptimal temperatures. However for 5 months the temperature was lowered to 121 rather than 134 degrees and the tissues released into the sewage treatment plant. The sewage treatment sludge (including the tissues) is agriculturally applied. However, the scrapie specialists at the lab were never told that the sludge with the tissues was placed on farmland. Therefore, when the lab issued their press release they thought the sludge went to landfil or incineration. The municipal officials and the ministry of Evironment officials failed to consider the possible infectivity of any unprocessed prions that went to land application. The quality of the 'biosolids' was not considered at any point. Now, in this instance, the amount of infective prion tissue may indeed have been relatively minimal and relatively diluted by the sludge, but the problem remains that the provincial and municipal officials failed to inform the scrapie researchers of the final fate of the tissues on farmland. The farmers have not been informed. The agriculture Ministry and the provincial scrapie expert for the provincial ministry of agriculture were not informed, the Ministry of Natural Resouces (wildlife) was not informed. We know so little about the incubation period and infectivity of prions that a prudent course of action would be to determine which farms received suspect sludge and to monitor those farm animals and nearby wildlife for effects for the next few years. Greater accountablilty and transparency is required." From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 10:19:42 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:19:42 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge still spinning on White House lawn Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Pundits are spinning the "sludge on the White House lawn" story - but still no word from the people who were pleased as punch to to put it there - the sludge industry. Al Rubin (retire Biosolids Coordinator for the EPA) figures that the White House lawn was covered with sludge about 5 times starting in the 1980s. Sludge from several different sources was used, including some sludge compost like Baltimore's Orgro that can have extremely high levels of toxic metals (lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury, etc). Why have we not seen any lab reports on what heavy metals are found on this lawn? Why is the focus still on one lonely sample result: 93 ppm lead. This elevated lead level begs for publication of the rest of the normal suite of soil testing parameters. If the lead is 8 times over background soil levels, what is the level of cadmium - a toxic metal that is sucked up into leafy green vegetables like kale and spinach? The Clintons aren't to blame, and the Obama family is to be applauded for their garden. Their problem is the sludge industry who sludged up their lawn before they moved in. The sludge industry has been promoting the spreading of these toxic wastes on public parks, the lawns of poor black urban families, fire ravaged lands, indeed anywhere they figure that the taxpayer can be tricked into picking up the tab to spread this sewer/industrial waste 'fertilizer'. .................................................................. Stagnation at White House May be Attributable to Sewer Sludge in President?s Produce by David Friedlander, New York City on 08. 2.09 Poor Obama: not only does he have to contend with Blue Dogs, but now it seems he is being poisoned by lead found in the People?s Garden at the White House. In truth, the levels, while not ideal, are far from unusual or unsafe for an urban garden. The Guardian states: The soil in the garden had lead concentrations of 93 parts per million of lead. Health experts say it is safe to raise leafy vegetables in soil with concentrations of 10-50 parts per million, and urban gardens typically have raised lead levels. However, it is advised for young children to be tested for exposure to lead if they play in areas where lead concentrations exceed 100 parts per million. The Environmental Protection Agency puts the threshold for dangerous lead levels at 300 parts per million. More interesting is one of the possible sources of contamination: sewer sludge. Under the Clinton Administration, a fertilizer called ComPRO?a type of compost made from sewer sludge?was advocated for use on White House grounds. The use of ComPRO at White House was seen by some as the EPA's way to demonstrate its safety. Andrew Kimbrell in Huffington Post described what the sludge ComPRO is made of : [It is] A stinking, sticky, dark-grey to black paste, it's everything homeowners, hospitals and industries put down their toilets and drains. Every material-turned-waste that our society produces (including prescription drugs and the sweepings of slaughterhouses), and that wastewater treatment plants are capable of removing from sewage, becomes sludge. The end product is a concentrated mass of heavy metals and carcinogenic, teratogenic, and hormone-disrupting chemicals, replete with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. There are some 80,000 to 90,000 industrial chemicals, including a host of dioxin-like deadly substances, which are allowed to be present in sludge under current EPA rules. What's worse, there's no way of knowing which toxic chemicals and heavy metals are entering the wastewater stream at any given time or in what concentrations. Sludge is always an unknown quantity, and therefore, assessing whether sludge is safe to use for growing food, is?in practice?impossible. But ComPRO is not the only potential source of lead. Since lead does not leave soil, over the course of the White House?s 217-year history, there could be a number of other potential culprits: Settled lead particulates from automobiles, which is an unlikely direct cause owing to the White House?s inset location. Although this could contribute to ComPRO contamination. Flaking lead based paint from natural deterioration or fire (the original White House was burned in 1812). Lead based pesticides; especially lead arsenate, but also mixtures of lead arsenate and copper and DDT. From the late 1890's through the late 1960's, various lead-based salts were mixed with elemental sulfur powders as the fungicide and insecticide of choice for ornamental plants such as blossoming cherries and roses (think rose garden); they were used for crabgrass control, and even on some vegetable crops. DDT basically replaced it. Officially, all insecticidal uses of Lead Arsenate in the USA were officially banned on 1 August 1988. But the People?s Garden will continue?this is spite of the Mid America CropLife Association (MACA) early objections that the garden?s organic credentials would scare people off of conventional growing methods (wonder why?). The Guardian reports of the project's continuatioin: ?The garden recently underwent extensive soil testing that proved it is completely safe," Katie McCormick Lelyveld, the first lady's spokeswoman, said. A lead level of 92 parts per million is significantly better than the government standard for a garden like this. The White House kitchen garden team is committed to producing fresh, safe and healthy food as a learning opportunities (sic) about healthy eating, and they'll continue to do so," Lelyveld said. Perhaps Michelle and Co. should have been more rigorous in their house and garden inspection before moving in. Maybe they could have used The Rodale Institute compost similar to the USDA organic farm. You can never be too thorough. After all, you never know what previous tenants could have done to your home. http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/08/stagnation-at-white-house-may-be-attributable-to-sewer-sludge-in-presidents-produce.php From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 10:38:02 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 10:38:02 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sudbury ON - Considering sludge compost Message-ID: http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1684471 Council considering P3 sewage facility Posted By DENIS ST. PIERRE, THE SUDBURY STAR Aug 4, 2009 Two months after being warned of the pitfalls for taxpayers from such projects, city officials are considering a local company's proposal to privately build and operate a sewage treatment facility for the municipality. Council's planning committee is being advised by staff to approve a rezoning application by William Day Construction Ltd., to allow the company to build a "bioreactor," or sewage-processing facility. Council's planning committee meets next Tuesday to consider the rezoning application. A report prepared by city planners states William Day Construction has applied to the Ontario Ministry of the Environment for approval to develop a "waste disposal pilot project." The processing facility would be built on industrial land owned by the company off Municipal Road 35, between Sudbury and Azilda, according to the city staff report. However, the company's land is not zoned properly for such a treatment plant, therefore the city would have to grant a rezoning to allow the project to proceed, the report states. "If this application is approved, the applicant will undertake a compost pilot study with waste being processed in an in-vessel composting unit," the report says. "The unit will be used for the processing of hauled sewage, waste biomass and processed organic waste." "The applicant is proposing to operate 10 hours a day, Monday to Friday," the report states. "The maximum waste receipt is proposed to be 95 tonnes per operating day and a maximum storage of 500 tonnes." If city councillors approve the rezoning application, William Day Construction still would be required to "satisfy all the requirements" of the provincial environment ministry before proceeding with the project, the city report states. "It should also be noted that if the proponent wishes to transfer waste to the city landfill site, approval from council will be required," the report adds. City officials began months ago to investigate options for a new processing and disposal system for so-called biosolids, or sewage sludge -- the solid product produced from standard sewage treatment plants. The city plans to abandon its decades-old practice of dumping sludge from its sewage treatment facilities into a tailings pond owned by Vale Inco. Authorities have insisted the practice does not present a health hazard, but residents in the tailings pond's vicinity often endure sickening odours from the pond. City officials have indicated a new sludge processing facility would be built adjacent to the city's main sewage treatment plant at Kelly Lake. The new facility would cost an estimated $30 million to $38 million to build. In June, city council was urged by the Canadian Union of Public Employees to steer clear of a public-private partnerships to finance and/or operate the proposed processing facility. Such "P3" arrangements invariably result in poorer service and higher costs to taxpayers, compared to public assets that are financed and operated by the municipality, according to CUPE, which represents more than 500,000 public-sector workers across the country. "P3s are more expensive than public infrastructure projects and, therefore, bad fiscal policy," council was told by Sid Ryan, CUPE's Ontario president. "P3s reduce accountability and transparency and are, therefore, bad public policy," Ryan said. Ryan cited a number of cases of P3 projects gone awry, in which taxpayers were left to pay for cost overruns after private operators walked away from the facilities. Mayor John Rodriguez said at the time he supports the city's traditional approach to infrastructure projects -- hiring private companies to design and build public facilities, but ensuring the municipality owns and operates its public assets. "I don't see the need for us to hire a third party ... to finance and run it for us," Rodriguez said. Neither the mayor, nor officials from William Day Construction, could be reached for comment Monday. While the proposal from William Day Construction calls for a pilot project, sources at city hall have confirmed the company has expressed an interest in building and operating a full-scale sludge-processing plant for the municipality. Although the company's industrial land off Municipal Road 35 is not zoned properly for the proposed sewage treatment facility, the proposal nevertheless "is deemed to conform with the (city's) Official Plan," states the report from city planners. "The addition of a waste processing plant at this location would be considered to be an appropriate use," the report states. "We see no adverse impacts arising from this application and therefore it is recommended for approval." Article ID# 1684471 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 11:19:37 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:19:37 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> New OSHA document discusses combustible dust hazards (like dried sludge biosolids) Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Drying sewage sludge 'biosolids' into pellets can create organic dust explosions. The U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) identified 281 combustible dust incidents between 1980 and 2005 that led to the deaths of 119 workers, injured 718, and extensively damaged numerous industrial facilities. ............................ http://www.docuticker.com/?p=27086 New OSHA document discusses combustible dust hazards Source: Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Communication Guidance for Combustible Dusts is a new guidance document recently published by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that assists chemical manufacturers and importers in recognizing the potential for dust explosions, identifying appropriate protective measures and the requirements for disseminating this information on material safety data sheets and labels. Combustible dusts are solids finely ground into fine particles, fibers, chips, chunks or flakes that can cause a fire or explosion when suspended in air under certain conditions. Types of dusts include metal (aluminum and magnesium), wood, plastic or rubber, biosolids, coal, organic (such as flour, sugar and paper, among others), and dusts from certain textiles. The document addresses the combustible dust hazards in relation to the Hazard Communication Standard, which is designed to ensure that chemical hazards are evaluated and the information concerning them is transmitted to employers and workers. To Read the whole 20 page document: http://www.osha.gov/Publications/3371combustible-dust.pdf ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' OSHA 3371-08 2009 Hazard Communication Guidance for Combustible Dusts U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA 3371-08 2009 Hazard Communication Guidance for Combustible Dusts Occupational Safety andHealth Act of 1970 ??To assure safe and healthful working conditions for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working conditions; by providing for research, information, education, and training in the field of occupational safety and health.?? This publication provides a general overview of a particular standards-related topic. This publication does not alter or determine compliance responsibilities which are set forth in OSHA standards, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act. Moreover, because interpretations and enforcement policy may change over time, for additional guidance on OSHA compliance requirements, the reader should consult current administrative interpretations and decisions by the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission and the courts. Material contained in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced, fully or partially, without permission. Source credit is requested but not required. This information will be made available to sensory impaired individuals upon request. Voice phone: (202) 693-1999; teletypewriter (TTY) number: 1-877-889-5627. Introduction Combustible dusts are fine particles that present an explosion hazard when suspended in air under certain conditions. A dust explosion can cause catastrophic loss of life, injuries, and destruction of buildings. The U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) identified 281 combustible dust incidents between 1980 and 2005 that led to the deaths of 119 workers, injured 718, and extensively damaged numerous industrial facilities. More recently, additional incidents have occurred. On February 7, 2008, a sugar dust explosion and subsequent fire at a sugar refinery in Port Wentworth, Georgia, caused 14 deaths and left many other workers seriously injured with severe burns. In many of these incidents, workers and managers were unaware of the potential for dust explosions, or failed to recognize the serious nature of dust explosion hazards. The CSB reviewed Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) of 140 known substances that produce combustible dusts and found poor or inadequate transmittal of information regarding potential dust hazards; 41% of the MSDSs reviewed by the CSB did not warn users about potential explosion hazards. Of the remaining 59% of MSDSs sampled, most of the information was either not stated in a place or manner clearly recognized by workers, or was not specific to hazards related to combustible dusts (CSB, 2006).1 The Hazard Communication Standard comprehensively addresses the evaluation of the potential hazards of chemicals and the communication of hazard information to workers (29 CFR 1910. 1200(a)(2)). It is a performance-oriented standard that applies to any chemical known to be present in the workplace in such a manner that workers may be exposed under normal conditions of use or in a foreseeable emergency (29 CFR 1910.1200 (b)(2)). Regarding dusts and other particulates, a 2 3 Contents Introduction...3 OSHA??s Hazard Communication Standard...4 Identifying and Controlling the Potential for Dust Explosions...5 MSDS Preparation...10 Product Labels...13 Training and Information...14 Additional Information...14 References...15 OSHA Assistance...17 Regional Offices...20 1 Investigation Report No. 2006-H-1 Combustible Dust Hazard Study. This guidance document is not a standard or regulation, and it creates no new legal obligations. It is advisory in nature, informational in content, and is intended to assist employers, manufacturers and importers to comply with OSHA??s Hazard Communication Standard.  Second, for every chemical found to be hazardous, the chemical manufacturer or importer must develop MSDSs and container labels to be transmitted to downstream users of the chemicals. Employers are required to maintain an MSDS in the workplace for each hazardous chemical that they use (Paragraphs (f), (g));  Third, all employers must develop a written hazard communication program and provide information and training to workers about the hazardous chemicals in their workplace (Paragraphs (e), (h)). The information components of this program ?C labels, MSDSs, and employee training ?C are all essential to the effective functioning of a hazard communication program. Identifying and Controlling the Potential for Dust Explosions The hazard determination must include an assessment of all physical and health hazards. The chemical manufacturer or importer must consider the potential exposures that may occur under normal conditions of use or in foreseeable emergencies, and address known hazards on the MSDS and, where appropriate, on the label prepared for the product. Regarding combustible dusts, anticipated types of operations, uses or downstream material processing that generate dusts should be considered normal conditions of use of a substance. These include operations and uses such as abrasive blasting, cutting, grinding, polishing or crushing of materials; conveying, mixing, sifting or screening dry materials; and the buildup of dried residue from processing wet materials. The CSB found that many of the MSDSs did not identify the potential for combustible dust explosions that could reasonably have been anticipated during downstream material processing (CSB, 2006). hazard evaluation must be conducted taking into consideration all discernible hazards, including that of explosibility. It is incumbent upon manufacturers and importers to provide information on the potential for and control of combustible dusts. (See CPL 02-02-038 Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication Standard (updated in 1998); CPL 03-00-008 Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program and letters of interpretation (Mattingly, 1986; English,1987)). This document is intended to help manufacturers and importers of chemicals recognize the potential for dust explosions and to identify appropriate protective measures as part of their hazard determination under the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). This evaluation of hazards ensures that downstream employers and workers are provided MSDSs with complete and accurate information regarding dust explosion hazards, appropriate information is included on labels, and that workers are properly trained regarding workplace combustible dust hazards. Adequate communication of hazard information is essential to ensuring that both employers and workers are aware of dustrelated hazards and measures that can be taken to prevent dust explosions. OSHA??s Hazard Communication Standard The purpose of the HCS is to ensure that the hazards of all chemicals produced or imported are evaluated and that information concerning their hazards is transmitted to employers and workers. The HCS has three main components:  First, chemical manufacturers and importers must review available scientific evidence concerning the physical and health hazards of the chemicals they produce or import to determine if they are hazardous (Paragraph (d)). This is called a hazard determination or hazard evaluation; 4 5 Fire and Explosions (www.osha.gov/dts/shib/ shib073105.html), dust particles with an effective diameter of less than 420 microns (those passing through a U.S. No. 40 standard sieve) should be deemed to meet the criterion of the definition. However, larger particles can still pose a deflagration hazard (for instance, as larger particles are moved, they can abrade each other, creating smaller particles). In addition, particles can stick together (agglomerate) due to electrostatic charges accumulated through handling, causing them to become explosible when dispersed. Types of dusts include, but are not limited to: metal dust, such as aluminum and magnesium; wood dust; plastic or rubber dust; biosolids; coal dust; organic dust, such as flour, sugar, paper, soap, and dried blood; and dusts from certain textiles. OSHA??s Combustible Dust poster provides examples of products or materials from which combustible dust explosions could occur if they are processed in powdered form. This poster can be accessed at www.osha.gov/Publications/ combustibledustposter.pdf. Five elements are necessary to initiate a dust explosion, often referred to as the ??Dust Explosion Pentagon??.2 The first three elements are those needed for a fire, i.e., the familiar ??fire triangle??: 1. Combustible dust (fuel); 2. Ignition source (heat); and, 3. Oxygen in air (oxidizer). An additional two elements must be present for a combustible dust explosion: 4. Dispersion of dust particles in sufficient quantity and concentration; and, 5. Confinement of the dust cloud. If one of the above five elements is missing, an explosion cannot occur. Examples of dust explosions under normal conditions of use Example 1: Plastic pellets shipped from a polyethylene plant rarely pose a combustible dust hazard until they are processed downstream where they produce dust particles. In 1991 in Littleton, New Hampshire an employee was injured due to a dust explosion while he was feeding 400 pounds of granular polyalphamethyl styrene (CAS 25014-31-7) through a micropulverizer (equipped with a .032-inch screen) into a dust collector. The dust collector had no provision for explosion relief or venting. Apparently, a piece of metal got past the magnet in the micropulverizer, ignited the dust in the system, and caused a fire and explosion that blew open the access door to the dust collector. Example 2: An aqueous solution of a combustible dust material can dry to produce combustible dust. In 2003 in Kinston, North Carolina 6 people were killed and more than 30 others were injured due to an explosion caused by the buildup of dust above suspended ceilings generated from the drying process of aqueous polyethene solution during the production of rubber stoppers. Source: CSB, Dust Incident Data Files Combustible dust is defined as a solid material composed of distinct particles or pieces, regardless of size, shape, or chemical composition, which presents a fire or deflagration hazard when suspended in air or some other oxidizing medium over a range of concentrations. Combustible dusts are often either organic or metal dusts that are finely ground into very small particles, fibers, fines, chips, chunks, flakes, or a small mixture of these. As discussed in OSHA??s Safety and Health Information Bulletin (SHIB): Combustible Dust in Industry: Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of 6 7 2 OSHA Fact Sheet, (March 2008), Hazard Alert:Combustible Dust Explosions. severe the explosion (See Table, below). Kst provides the best ??single number?? estimate of the anticipated behavior of a dust deflagration. Different dusts of the same chemical material can have different ignitability and explosibility characteristics, depending upon physical characteristics such as particle size, shape, and moisture content. These physical characteristics can change during manufacturing, use or while the material is being processed. Any combustible dust with a Kst value greater than zero can be subject to dust deflagration. Even weak explosions can cause significant damage, injury and death. For example, sugar has a relatively low Kst but it fueled a tragic explosion in 2008 that killed 14 workers. Specific guidance measures to prevent explosions can be found in OSHA??s SHIB Combustible Dust in Industry: Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of Fire and Explosions, which lists measures to control dusts, eliminate ignition sources, and limit the effects of explosions to minimize injuries. Initial preventative steps are to contain combustible dust to areas that are properly designed and located, with ignition sources either eliminated or controlled. Equipment or spaces such as ducts, dust collectors, vessels, and processing equipment that contain combustible dust should be designed in a manner to prevent leaks to minimize the escape of dust into work areas. Any dust that settles on workplace surfaces An initial (primary) dust explosion in processing equipment may shake loose accumulated dust, or damage a containment system (such as a duct, vessel, or collector). This causes the dust to become airborne and this additional airborne dust, if ignited, may cause one or more secondary explosions. These can be more destructive than a primary explosion due to the increased quantity and concentration of dispersed combustible dust and the larger ignition source. The ease of ignition and the severity of a combustible dust explosion are typically influenced by particle size. Other factors that influence the explosiveness of dusts include moisture content, ambient humidity, oxygen available for combustion, the shape of dust particles, and the concentration of dust in the air. Physical properties used to measure combustible dusts include:  MIE, the minimum ignition energy, which predicts the ease and likelihood of ignition of a dispersed dust cloud.  MEC, the minimum explosible concentration, which measures the minimum amount of dust dispersed in air required to spread an explosion. (The MEC is analogous to the Lower Flammable Limit (LFL) or Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) for gases and vapors in air).  Kst, the dust deflagration index, measures the relative explosion severity compared to other dusts. The larger the value for Kst, the more 8 9 Examples of KstValues for DifferentTypes of Dusts Dust explosion class* Kst (bar.m/s)* Characteristic* Typical material** St 0 0 No explosion Silica St 1>0 and ?? 200 Weak explosion Powdered milk, charcoal, sulfur, sugar and zinc St 2>200 and ?? 300 Strong explosion Cellulose, wood flour, and poly methyl acrylate St 3>300 Very strong explosion Anthraquinone, aluminum, and magnesium The actual class is sample specific and will depend on varying characteristics of the material such as particle size or moisture. * OSHA CPL 03-00-008 - Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program. ** NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Prevention by Deflagration Venting. The following MSDS requirements are applicable to combustible dust hazards:  The chemical and common name(s) of the hazardous chemical or the chemical and common names of all ingredients which have been determined to present a physical hazard when present in a mixture (1910.1200(g)(2)(i) (C)(1));  Physical and chemical characteristics of the hazardous chemical (for example, vapor pressure or flash point) including the potential for fire, explosion, and reactivity (if known, Kst, MIE, MEC and particle size are combustible dust characteristics) (1910.1200(2)(g)(ii) and (iii));  Any generally applicable precautions for safe handling and use, which are known to the chemical manufacturer, importer or employer preparing the MSDS, including appropriate hygienic practices, protective measures during repair and maintenance of contaminated equipment, and procedures for cleanup of spills and leaks (1910.1200(g)(2)(viii)); and  Any generally applicable control measures, which are known to the chemical manufacturer, importer or employer preparing the MSDS, such as appropriate engineering controls, work practices, or personal protective equipment (1910.1200(g)(2)(ix)). should be removed through a routinely implemented housekeeping program. Areas or equipment potentially subject to explosions, including the dust collection system, should also be designed to relieve pressure in a safe manner, or be provided with proper suppression, explosion prevention systems, or an oxygen-deficient atmosphere. MSDS Preparation The HCS requires chemical manufacturers and importers to develop an MSDS for each hazardous chemical they produce or import. Chemical manufacturers and importers must provide any generally applicable precautions for safe handling and use on the MSDS (29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(2)(viii)). They must also determine generally applicable control measures such as appropriate engineering controls, work practices, or personal protective equipment, and include that information on the MSDS (29 CFR 1910.1200(g)(2)(ix)). Employers, in turn, must retain an MSDS in the workplace for each hazardous chemical that they use and ensure that MSDSs are readily accessible to workers. MSDSs provide comprehensive hazard information, and serve as the key reference document for exposed workers and others, such as health professionals providing services to those workers. New information regarding chemical hazards or protective measures must be added to the MSDS when the preparer becomes aware of this information. Updating MSDSs will provide employers and workers with the most current information needed to understand the hazards associated with combustible dusts, as well as appropriate protective measures to be taken. Dissemination of this updated information is also critical to reduce exposures to combustible dusts, which have been associated with multiple incidents. 10 11 Examples of combustible dust warning information on the MSDS (Presented in the ANSI (Z400.1) Format) Section 2. Hazard Identification: Emergency Overview WARNING! MAY FORM COMBUSTIBLE DUST CONCENTRATIONS INAIR (DURING PROCESSING) Section 5. Fire Fighting Measures: Explosion: Avoid generating dust; fine dust dispersed in air in sufficient concentrations, and in the presence of an ignition source is a potential dust explosion hazard. Section 6. Accidental Release Measures: Dust Deposits should not be allowed to accumulate on surfaces, as these may form an explosive mixture if they are released into the atmosphere in sufficient concentration. Avoid dispersal of dust in the air (i.e., clearing dust surfaces with compressed air). Nonsparking tools should be used. Section 7. Handling and Storage: Minimize dust generation and accumulation. Routine housekeeping should be instituted to ensure that dusts do not accumulate on surfaces. Dry powders can build static electricity charges when subjected to the friction of transfer and mixing operations. Provide adequate precautions, such as electrical grounding and bonding, or inert atmospheres. Section 8. Exposure controls/personal protection: It is recommended that all dust control equipment such as local exhaust ventilation and material transport systems involved in handling of this product contain explosion relief vents or an explosion suppression system or an oxygendeficient environment. Ensure that dust-handling systems (such as exhaust ducts, dust collectors, vessels, and processing equipment) are designed in a manner to prevent the escape of dust into the work area (i.e., there is no leakage from the equipment). Use only appropriately classified electrical equipment and powered industrial trucks: Section 16. Other Information Refer to NFPA 654, Standard for the Prevention of Fire and Dust Explosions from the Manufacturing, Processing, and Handling of Combustible Particulate Solids, for safe handling. 3 Product Labels Containers of material with HCS physical and health hazards are subject to the labeling requirements of the HCS (29 CFR 1910.1200(f)). Manufacturers, importers and distributors are required to assess available evidence regarding a product's hazards and must consider exposures under normal conditions of use or in foreseeable emergencies when evaluating what hazards must appear on the label.Where manufacturers are aware that the downstream use of their product routinely generates combustible dusts, a warning addressing a potential explosion hazard should be included on the label as an immediate visual reminder. The HCS requires that manufacturers and employers determine and provide appropriate hazard warning language for labels. As discussed in CPL 02-02-038 - CPL 2-2.38D - Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication Standard, the label is intended to be an immediate visual reminder of the hazards of a chemical. It is not necessary, however, that every hazard presented by a chemical be listed on the label. The MSDS is used for this purpose. Manufacturers, importers and distributors will have to assess the evidence regarding the product's hazards and must consider exposures under normal conditions of use or in foreseeable emergencies when evaluating what hazard warnings must be listed on the label. An example of combustible dust warning information on a label: Warning: May Form Combustible (Explosive) Dust - Air Mixtures Keep away from all ignition sources including heat, sparks and flame. Keep container closed and grounded. Prevent dust accumulations to minimize explosion hazard. 12 13 3 NFPA 654 is one of several potential references that discuss preventative measures for combustible dusts. Please see the references section, below, for additional resources. Program (NEP) Instruction (2008); developed a Combustible Dust Fact Sheet and poster, a Safety and Health Information Bulletin (Combustible Dust in Industry: Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of Fire and Explosions) and a Combustible Dust Safety and Health Topics web page (www.osha. gov/ dsg/combustibledust/index.html). In addition, OSHA??s Combustible Dust NEP will increase enforcement activities and focus on specific industry groups that have experienced frequent combustible dust incidents. References OSHA Combustible Dust Safety and Health Topics Page (www.osha.gov/dsg/combustibledust/index.html):  Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program Instruction, OSHA Directive CPL 03-00-008, (2008).  Safety and Health Information Bulletin (SHIB) (07-31-2005) Combustible Dust in Industry: Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of Fire and Explosions.  OSHA Fact Sheet, (March 2008), Hazard Alert: Combustible Dust Explosions.  OSHA Poster (2008), Combustible Dust. Applicable OSHA requirements include:  General Duty Clause, Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Employers must keep workplaces free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm).  ??1910.22 General requirements (See Housekeeping)  ??1910.38 Emergency action plans  ??1910.39 Fire prevention plans  ??1910.94 Ventilation  ??1910.157 Portable fire extinguishers  ??1910.178 Powered industrial trucks  ??1910.269 Electric Power generation, transmission and distribution (See Coal and ash handling) Training and Information The purpose of the HCS is to provide information so that workers and employers can take the appropriate steps to protect themselves. When workers are trained to recognize and prevent hazards they can be instrumental in recognizing unsafe conditions, taking preventative action, and/or alerting management. The HCS requires employers to inform workers about the general requirements of the standard, operations where hazardous chemicals are present, and the location of the written HCS program, MSDSs, and hazardous chemical inventory (29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(2)). In addition, employers are required to specifically train workers in the methods used to detect the presence or release of a hazardous chemical, the physical and health hazards of the chemical, and control measures (including work practices, emergency procedures, and personal protective equipment) (29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)). The first two components of the HCS (evaluation of hazards and provision of hazard information via labels and MSDSs) provide the foundation for the worker training. The MSDSs/labels provide the necessary baseline information for worker training regarding physical and health hazards, personal protective equipment, and emergency procedures. Employers who use materials capable of producing combustible dusts must evaluate those operations and tasks where dusts are present or may be generated and provide the required information and training to workers. Additional Information In order to focus attention on combustible dust hazards and promote awareness, OSHA has undertaken several initiatives. The agency has reissued the Combustible Dust National Emphasis 14 15 Particulate Solids  NFPA 655, Standard for the Prevention of Sulfur Fires and Explosions  NFPA 664, Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Explosions in Wood Processing and Woodworking Facilities  NFPA Fire Protection Handbook, 19th Edition Other: FM 7-76, ??Prevention and Mitigation of Combustible Dust Explosions and Fires,?? Loss Prevention Data Sheet 7-76. FM Global, 2001. OSHA Assistance OSHA can provide extensive help through a variety of programs, including technical assistance about effective safety and health programs, state plans, workplace consultations, and training and education. Safety and Health Program Management System Guidelines Effective management of worker safety and health protection is a decisive factor in reducing the extent and severity of work-related injuries and illnesses and their related costs. In fact, an effective safety and health management system forms the basis of good worker protection, can save time and money, increase productivity and reduce employee injuries, illnesses and related workers?? compensation costs. To assist employers and workers in developing effective safety and health management systems, OSHA published recommended Safety and Health Program Management Guidelines (54 Federal Register (16): 3904-3916, January 26, 1989). These voluntary guidelines can be applied to all places of employment covered by OSHA. The guidelines identify four general elements critical to the development of a successful safety and health management system:  Management leadership and worker involvement,  Worksite analysis,  Hazard prevention and control, and  Safety and health training. The guidelines recommend specific actions, under each of these general elements, to achieve an effective  ??1910.272 Grain handling facilities  ??1910.307 Hazardous (classified) locations  ??1910.1200 Hazard Communication Letters of Interpretation: Jan. 16, 1986 - Application of the Hazard Communication standard to a nuisance particulate, Honorable Mack Mattingly. November 20, 1987 - Applicability of the revised Hazard Communication Standard to the grain industry, Honorable Glenn English. ANSI:  ANSI Z129.1 American National Standard for Hazardous Industrial Chemicals - Precautionary Labeling  ANSI Z400.1 American National Standard for Hazardous Industrial Chemicals ?C Material Safety Data Sheets ?C Preparation U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board: Investigation Report No. 2006-H-1 Combustible Dust Hazard Study, November 2006. Dust Incident Data File at www.csb.gov. The primary National Fire Protection Association consensus standards and documents related to this hazard (see www.nfpa.org to view NFPA standards):  NFPA 61, Standard for the Prevention of Fires and Dust Explosions in Agricultural and Food Processing Facilities  NFPA 68, Standard on Explosion Protection by Deflagration Venting  NFPA 69, Standard on Explosion Prevention Systems  NFPA 484, Standard for Combustible Metals  NFPA 499, Recommended Practice for the Classification of Combustible Dusts and of Hazardous (Classified) Locations for Electrical Installations in Chemical Process Areas  NFPA 654, Standard for the Prevention of Fire and Dust Explosions from the Manufacturing, Processing, and Handling of Combustible 16 17 building cooperative relationships with groups of employers and workers. These partnerships are voluntary relationships between OSHA, employers, worker representatives, and others (e.g., trade unions, trade and professional associations, universities, and other government agencies). For more information on this and other agency programs, contact your nearest OSHA office, or visit OSHA??s website at www.osha.gov. OSHA Training and Education OSHA area offices offer a variety of information services, such as technical advice, publications, audiovisual aids and speakers for special engagements. OSHA??s Training Institute in Arlington Heights, IL, provides basic and advanced courses in safety and health for Federal and state compliance officers, state consultants, Federal agency personnel, and private sector employers, workers and their representatives. The OSHA Training Institute also has established OSHA Training Institute Education Centers to address the increased demand for its courses from the private sector and from other federal agencies. These centers are colleges, universities, and nonprofit organizations that have been selected after a competition for participation in the program. OSHA also provides funds to nonprofit organizations, through grants, to conduct workplace training and education in subjects where OSHA believes there is a lack of workplace training. Grants are awarded annually. For more information on grants, training and education, contact the OSHA Training Institute, Directorate of Training and Education, 2020 South Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005, (847) 297-4810, or see Training on OSHA??s website at www.osha.gov. For further information on any OSHA program, contact your nearest OSHA regional office listed at the end of this publication. Information Available Electronically OSHA has a variety of materials and tools available on its website at www.osha.gov. These include electronic tools, such as Safety and HealthTopics, eTools, Expert Advisors; regulations, directives and publications; videos and other information for employers and workers. OSHA??s software programs and eTools safety and health management system. The Federal Register notice is available online at www.osha.gov. State Programs The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (OSH Act) encourages states to develop and operate their own job safety and health plans. OSHA approves and monitors these plans. Twenty-four states, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands currently operate approved state plans: 22 cover both private and public (state and local government) employment; Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and the Virgin Islands cover the public sector only. States and territories with their own OSHA-approved occupational safety and health plans must adopt standards identical to, or at least as effective as, the Federal OSHA standards. Consultation Services Consultation assistance is available on request to employers who want help in establishing and maintaining a safe and healthful workplace. Largely funded by OSHA, the service is provided at no cost to the employer. Primarily developed for smaller employers with more hazardous operations, the consultation service is delivered by state governments employing professional safety and health consultants. Comprehensive assistance includes an appraisal of all mechanical systems, work practices, and occupational safety and health hazards of the workplace and all aspects of the employer??s present job safety and health program. In addition, the service offers assistance to employers in developing and implementing an effective safety and health program. No penalties are proposed or citations issued for hazards identified by the consultant. OSHA provides consultation assistance to the employer with the assurance that his or her name and firm and any information about the workplace will not be routinely reported to OSHA enforcement staff. For more information concerning consultation assistance, see OSHA??s website at www.osha.gov. Strategic Partnership Program OSHA??s Strategic Partnership Program helps encourage, assist and recognize the efforts of partners to eliminate serious workplace hazards and achieve a high level of worker safety and health. Most strategic partnerships seek to have a broad impact by 18 19 Region IV (AL, FL, GA, KY,* MS, NC,* SC,* TN*) 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Room 6T50 Atlanta, GA 30303 (404) 562-2300 RegionV (IL, IN,* MI,* MN,* OH, WI) 230 South Dearborn Street, Room 3244 Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 353-2220 RegionVI (AR, LA, NM,* OK, TX) 525 Griffin Street, Room 602 Dallas, TX 75202 (972) 850-4145 RegionVII (IA,* KS, MO, NE) Two Pershing Square 2300 Main Street, Suite 1010 Kansas City, MO 64108-2416 (816) 283-8745 RegionVIII (CO, MT, ND, SD, UT,* WY*) 1999 Broadway, Suite 1690 PO Box 46550 Denver, CO 80202-5716 (720) 264-6550 Region IX (AZ,* CA,* HI,* NV,* and American Samoa, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands) 90 7th Street, Suite 18-100 San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 625-2547 Region X (AK,* ID, OR,* WA*) 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 715 Seattle, WA 98101-3212 (206) 553-5930 *These states and territories operate their own OSHA-approved job safety and health programs and cover state and local government workers as well as private sector personnel. The Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Virgin Islands plans cover public employees only. States with approved programs must have standards that are identical to, or at least as effective as, the Federal OSHA standards. Note: To get contact information for OSHA area offices, OSHAapproved State Plans, and OSHA Consultation Projects, please visit us online at www.osha.gov or call us at 1-800-321-OSHA (6742). walk you through challenging safety and health issues and common problems to find the best solutions for your workplace. OSHA Publications OSHA has an extensive publications program. For a listing of free items, visit OSHA??s website at www.osha.gov or contact the OSHA Publications Office, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW, N-3101, Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202) 693-1888 or fax to (202) 693-2498. Contacting OSHA To report an emergency, file a complaint, or seek OSHA advice, assistance, or products, call (800) 321- OSHA or contact your nearest OSHA Regional or Area office listed below. The teletypewriter (TTY) number is (877) 889-5627. Written correspondence can be mailed to the nearest OSHA Regional or Area Office listed below or to OSHA??s national office at: U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, 200 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20210. By visiting OSHA??s website at www.osha.gov, you can also:  File a complaint online;  Submit general inquires about workplace safety and health electronically; and  Find more information about OSHA and occupational safety and health. OSHA Regional Offices Region I (CT,* ME, MA, NH, RI, VT*) JFK Federal Building, Room E340 Boston, MA 02203 (617) 565-9860 Region II (NJ,* NY,* PR,* VI*) 201 Varick Street, Room 670 New York, NY 10014 (212) 337-2378 Region III (DE, DC, MD,* PA, VA,* WV) The Curtis Center 170 S. Independence Mall West, Suite 740 West Philadelphia, PA 19106-3309 (215) 861-4900 20 21 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 4 17:56:43 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 17:56:43 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Flushing Out the Truth - Sewage Dumping in Ontario Message-ID: To read the whole 15 page report go to: http://www.cwwa.ca/pdf_files/Ecojustice%20Report%20on%20Ontario's%20sewerage.pdf Sewage Dumping in Ontario - An Ecojustice Investigation Each year billions of litres of sewage are dumped into the Great Lakes and Ontario?s waterways. This occurs when sewage is either bypassed from municipal sewage treatment plants or directly released into the environment from antiquated combined sewer systems, which carry sewage and stormwater in the same pipes and are prone to overflowing during wet weather. The Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) estimates that the total volume of sewage dumped from sewage treatment plant bypasses was approximately 18 billion litres in 2006 and 15 billion litres in 2007, with at least eight municipalities releasing more than a billion litres during that period. Despite being the largest single source of water pollution into Ontario waterbodies including the Great Lakes, this information is rarely presented for public consumption, instead being buried in arcane provincial government databases. Further, the data collected does not provide an accurate picture of all sewage bypasses in Ontario, as the province does not even collect data for 215 sewage treatment facilities that are operated by the Ontario Clean Water Agency (OCWA), one of the province?s own agencies. Despite being an equally serious pollution source, information on Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs) is even scarcer. While the province can estimate amounts of bypasses, it is simply not able to accurately estimate the total volume of sewage dumped because the volume and frequency of CSO events are not routinely measured, estimated or consistently reported. However, it is fair to assume that the volume of pollution from CSOs in Ontario is massive. Ecojustice?s 2006 survey of 20 American and Canadian cites in the Great Lakes Basin found that they dumped more than 90 billion litres of raw sewage mixed with stormwater in one year through CSOs. Thus, the findings of this report demonstrate that the province simply does not know how much sewage is escaping proper treatment and being dumped in Ontario?s waterways. Based on our analysis of available information, it is clear that sewage dumping is a problem that is unlikely to improve without serious investment, particularly as climate change leads to more frequent storms that overwhelm combined sewers systems. This report uses the government?s own data to underscore the need for better data collection, public reporting and an investment in solutions to mitigate this enormous source of pollution to Ontario?s water bodies. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 5 16:28:15 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2009 16:28:15 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> "PeePoo" Single Use Toilet Bag - Turning human waste to fertilizer Message-ID: http://springwise.com/non-profit_social_cause/peepoobag/ Single Use Toilet Bag - Turning human waste to fertilizer - Swedish design PeePoo It's a sobering fact that a full 40 percent of the world's population?some 2.6 billion people?lack regular access to a toilet. Add to that the fact that one child dies every 15 seconds from water contamination, and it's not hard to see the motivation behind the Peepoo bag. One of the UN Millennium Development Goals, set in 2000, is to halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to drinking water and sanitation, but so far progress has been minimal. With that in mind, Swedish Peepoople created the Peepoo bag to serve as a personal, portable and low-cost latrine for all the many people who don't have one. Designed for use sitting, squatting or standing, the single-use, biodegradable plastic bag measures 14 by 38 cm and is lined with a urea-coated gauze layer that disinfects all waste. Used bags are odour-free for at least 24 hours and are safe for burial underground. Within two to four weeks after use, however, their contents get converted to high-quality fertiliser?something that's also rare in many areas and so could become a source of income and further enrichment for an individual or village. Following field tests last year in Kenya and India, the Peepoo bag is scheduled to begin production this summer. Along with such efforts as distributing free insect nets to children in malaria-ridden areas and abolishing fees for school uniforms in poor countries, the Peepoo bag qualifies as a quick-win project that could rapidly improve the lives of many people. One to get in on, help out with, or be inspired by! Website: www.peepoople.com Contact: info at peepoople.com From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 8 10:47:27 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2009 10:47:27 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge on White House Garden Shows Dangers of Urban, Suburban Gardening Message-ID: http://www.examiner.com/x-17874-Seattle-Green-Living-Examiner~y2009m8d6-Tainted-White-House-nonorganic-garden-shows-dangers-of-urban-sururban-gardening Tainted White House non-organic garden shows dangers of urban, suburban gardening August 6, 2009 Seattle Green Living Examiner David Kuhns The Obama White House garden has 97ppm of lead, a result of sewage sludge being used as lawn fertilizer. Many urban and suburban gardens face similar "yard pollution" issues, with unknown risk factors involved. High levels of toxins not uncommon in gardens Recent allogations that the White House's "organic garden" is tainted by lead and other toxins from sludge point out the problems organic gardeners face, especially in urban and suburban areas. Reports that the recently-created White House organic garden suffers from nearly 100 parts per million lead content has some saying "it doesn't matter" and "it's to be expected in any urban garden". The reality is, the White House garden soil -- probably tainted by years of putting sewer sludge as fertilizer on the lawn -- would barely qualify to be put in a "non-HazMat" dump site. The Obama's aren't alone. Examples of dangerous garden plots Other urban and suburban gardens suffer the same plight. A few examples: Several houses in a Phoenix suburb had severe soil contamination. The former cotton field site had been a crop-sprayer's runway, and the garden areas of the houses' back yards were where the planes' tanks were cleaned and rinsed. A Seattle-area garden suffered massive dieoff after the owner moved topsoil from one part of the yard to another. The topsoil had been in a barn area before the suburb was developed. Closer examination revealed that it may have had gallons of herbicides and diesel fuel dumped onto it. A Wisconsin retiree used salmon carcasses to fertilize his garden. As reports about high levels of toxins in Lake Michigan salmon surfaced, he stopped the practice and moved his garden elsewhere. As more people make a move to have organic gardens, especially in urban and suburban areas, more problems like the Obama's White House garden are going to surface. Gardeners need to be as cautious about where they build their garden as they are about what they put in the soil. This is especially true as we compost grass from chemical-filled lawns. A film about one woman's fight to get rid of chemical lawn treatments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09H97nxVjXk&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eexaminer%2Ecom%2Fx%2D17874%2DSeattle%2DGreen%2DLiving%2DExaminer%7Ey2009m8d6%2DTainted%2DWhite%2DHouse%2Dnonorganic%2Dgarden%2Dshows%2Ddangers%2Dof%2Du&feature=player_embedded Seattle Green Living Examiner David Kuhns, www.cyranowriter.com, has been trying to garden organically since 1969. As the first in his neighborhood (more than 15 years ago) to rip up his front lawn and create an "edible front yard", he empathizes with the Obama family: it ain't easy being green. Still, he hopes we can all help each other be aware of the dangers, and use best practices to clean up what's been messed up. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 12:04:58 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 12:04:58 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Eat s*** and die: sewer sludge on the White House organic garden Message-ID: http://www.examiner.com/x-17874-Seattle-Green-Living-Examiner~y2009m8d9-Eat-s-and-die-Sewer-sludge--more-potential-problems-for-White-House-organic-victory-garden Eat s*** and die: Sewer sludge = more potential problems for White House organic garden August 9, 2009 Seattle Green Living Examiner David Kuhns Wastewater treatment plants like King County's could help create and spread antibiotic resistant diseases, especially through sewer sludge like that spread on the White House lawn-turned-organic garden. Obama's organic garden: Disease-laden problems? New concerns are being raised as to whether the Obama White House organic garden and other similar urban/suburban gardens are safe to eat out of. Previous articles here and elsewhere pointed out that the lead content in the White House vegetable garden is 97ppm. This is thought to be caused by the application of sewer plant "sludge" or bio-solids -- as a fertilizer --on the White House lawn, primarily during the Clinton administration. Wastewater treatment sludge / biosolids may contain super-pathogens with antibiotic resistance There could be much bigger issues: Some scientists claim that current wastewater treatment plant practices do no remove pathogens immune to various antibiotics and chlorine. In fact, some say that the wastewater treatment facilities combination of contaminated fecal matter may be allowing the spread of so-called "super-pathogens". Using sewer sludge to treat gardens could encourage the spread of these super-pathogens. In other words, literally: "Eat sh** and die". Contrary to popular myth, sewer plants, including King County's wastewater treatment plants that produce a compost-like material from sewer sludge, fail to kill pathogens. Experts claim the process of sewage treatment may augment the levels of antibiotic resistance and virulence within pathogens. This may be especially dangerous as wastewater treatment plants sell composted sewer sludge to unsuspecting customers to use on their gardens and yards. While King County's composted waste bi-product claims to be safe for application on gardens, some say the currently-used water quality laboratory tests, as demanded by governmental standards, fail to accurately reflect the true extent of contained pathogens. Another article shows toxic issues faced by the Obama's White House garden and other urban gardens. A video on the City of Sequim's wastewater treatment plant showing how sludge evolves into a Class A bio-solid for use on flower beds and elsewhere. Seattle Green Living Examiner David Kuhns writes web content as http://www.cyranowriter.com. He used to use Milorganite and other sewage sludge-turned-compost biosolids on his lawn and garden, but is now rethinking the practice. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 12:05:33 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 12:05:33 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Ventura California - sludge dried into landfill cover Message-ID: Sanitation district goes green with biosolids project By Paul Sisolak 08/06/2009 An environmentally friendly waste disposal project in Ventura County, seen as the largest of its kind in the country, should be on track and running within a few months, according to county sanitation officials. The Ventura Regional Sanitation District?s (VRSD) brand new biosolids facility, which has the ability to break down and turn wastes into nonpolluting forms, is located at the Toland Landfill between Santa Paula and Fillmore. It?s hoped this will drastically free up landfill space that would otherwise be slowly encroached by trash buildup. The $19 million prototype facility, funded by the district, is composed of several trash hoppers, burners and generators that are designed to take wastewater and sewer plant solids, known as biosolids ? a mostly aqueous, sludgy byproduct ? and treat them for use as a fertilizer cover in the landfill so that existing trash can be better decomposed. Biosolids are formulated through wastewater treatment plants, then shipped into the landfill. According to Gary Lawler, district general manager, one of the environmental benefits of the biosolids project is reduced truck traffic on highways and roads. ?Historically, almost everyone in Southern California has been hauling (biosolids) up to Kern County,? Lawler said. According to Jim Monahan, a Ventura City Council member who also sits on the VRSD Board of Directors, this practice has been in place for more than 50 years. By implementing the program, says Monahan, more than one million truck trips a year, hauling biosolids from Ventura County and beyond to Kern, can be avoided and later eliminated outright, cutting down on air pollution and greenhouse gases from vehicle emissions, and fuel costs. Under the new program, says Frank Kiesler, an engineer for the district, nine to 10 trucks per day haul biosolids to the Toland site, where more than 170 tons are treated to extract bacteria and waste. About eight tons of biosolids at a time are processed in three hours. ?It?s a sterilization process,? Kiesler said. ?The typical method is to burn [the methane gas byproduct]. That?ll stop? with the new project, he added. Part of the treatment process involves drying the sludgy material into hardened pieces that are used as cover for the hilltop landfill, in lieu of using dirt. It takes 370 cubic yards of biosolids, according to Kiesler, to cover the 1,400 tons of trash brought daily to the landfill. The trash generates natural, methane gases when broken down. Likewise, said Kiesler, gases released into the atmosphere from the drying and treatment of the biosolids are carbon-based and safer. The facility?s nine biosolid turbines, he noted, operate on about 320 kilowatts of power. Data from the sanitary district indicates that as much as 15,000 tons of fossil-fueled, conventionally powered energy can be offset by the new facility. It?s compliant with regulations from the county air pollution control district, Kiesler says. Monahan says a substantial savings ? upward of $1 million a year ? can be had from the greener, more efficient process. ?Instead of buying the gas to operate,? he said, ?we use methane.? Monahan said the VRSD fashioned its biosolids project after a similarly established program in Fenton, Texas. Earlier this year, when the Ventura facility began testing its own program, the County Board of Supervisors awarded the sanitation district a Climate Change Action Award for its efforts. Another related project in the planning/permitting stages is a trash incineration program. Coordinated with the biosolids program, it?s intended to cut down on landfill space, meaning fewer biosolids will be needed to cover less trash. ?It?ll remove the need for a landfill, eventually,? Monahan says. Monahan notes that Richard Baldwin, a sanitation district consultant who once headed the county air pollution control district, is spearheading the permit process, which could see additional facilities built at the landfill, once approved by county supervisors. As with the biosolids program, Ventura looked elsewhere, this time toward Temecula, which has a trash burning program in place. ?The idea is that the material, the residue, could be blended in sand or concrete,? he said. It is hoped the incineration project will be environmentally friendly, as well, because the same natural, methane gas from decomposed trash is the only kind released into the air when burned, according to Monahan. Monahan said he intends to bring the proposal before his colleagues on the Ventura City Council in the near future. paul at vcreporter.com http://www.vcreporter.com/cms/story/detail/sanitation_district_goes_green_with_biosolids_project/7151/ From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 12:14:57 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 12:14:57 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Kansas puts sludge on trees destined for public parks Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Kansas City is putting sewage sludge on trees and bushes...but these sludge contaminated soils will end up on public parks - high human contact areas. They clearly learned nothing from the Livermore Park contamination story. Livermore Park is now contamined with radioactivity when trees fertilized with radioactive sludge were planted into the park. Look at this: http://list.web.net/archives/sludgewatch-l/2005-March.txt (reproduced below the Kansas story) ................................. http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/story/1360337.html Aug 2 2009 Kansas City turns human waste into fertilizer for city trees By MATT CAMPBELL The Kansas City Star Kansas City is turning black into green: black as in sewage and green as in leafy trees. The city is using ?biosolids? ? yes, they are what they sound like ? as a high-power fertilizer to nourish hundreds of saplings destined to shade the city?s streets and grace its parks. But the benefits go beyond aesthetics. The city saves money on trees, the trees improve air quality, and something distasteful gets turned into something useful. ?We?re trying to do the full circle here,? said Forest Decker, manager of forestry and conservation in the Kansas City Parks and Recreation Department. Decker looked out recently on two acres of young trees planted in rows on the grounds of the city?s Birmingham sewage treatment plant in the bottoms on the north side of the Missouri River. Behind him on the hill were large lagoons storing human byproducts that used to be incinerated. For several years, Tim Walters, agronomist for the Kansas City Water Services Department, has been using biosolids to fertilize trees and crops on the roughly 1,300-acre property. Last fall, Decker?s crew and volunteers also began planting young trees here for later transplantation throughout the city. Kansas City receives the trees, of a variety of species, for free from a nonprofit organization called Forest ReLeaf of Missouri. By the time they are transplanted, the city will have spent about $80 a tree, roughly a third of the cost to buy from a commercial nursery. That will be a great help as the city aims toward a goal of planting 120,000 additional trees in the coming decade. Decker can plant about 625 trees an acre, and he has 40 acres of room to expand. The first saplings will be big enough to transplant by fall 2010. That?s a quick turnaround. ?In normal conditions, it would probably take them four years to reach the size that we need them to be,? Decker said. ?We?re going to cut that time in half.? That is because of the rich nitrogen content and other nutrients in the biosolids. Elsewhere on the water department property, cottonwoods planted just four years ago and fertilized with biosolids soar 50 feet or higher. The department also grows corn and soybeans with the stuff and got $680,000 by selling last year?s crop for animal feed or biodiesel fuel. All that is gravy for the water department, which also saves about $20,000 a month by not incinerating the biosolids, Walters said. ?We?re getting rid of something that used to be considered a waste and used to cost us a lot of money to deal with,? he said. ?Now we?re making money on the deal.? The Birmingham sewage plant takes in waste from Kansas City, North, as well as Liberty and Gladstone. After initial treatment to remove most of the liquids, what?s left gets pumped under the river to the Blue River plant in the East Bottoms. There the solids from Birmingham and other treatment plants in the city are further processed, or ?cooked,? before being pumped back to the lagoons at Birmingham. Walters? operation handles about 8,000 dry tons of biosolids a year and could use even more. The material contains about 250,000 pounds of nitrogen. By spraying it on the soil, Walters estimates he also is sequestering about 1,125 tons of carbon that otherwise would go into the atmosphere. Such operations are not unique to Kansas City. The Environmental Protection Agency, which regulates the use of biosolids, estimates about half of them produced in the country are returned to the land. But Decker said he is not aware of many other places where biosolids are used to nurture trees for transplanting on public property. The Birmingham lagoons have a noticeable odor up close, but the operation is in a relatively isolated area. Monitoring wells on site and at the river allow officials to make sure they are not discharging excessive amounts of nitrogen or other chemicals or heavy metals into the water table or the river. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources also watches the results. These biosolids are not processed enough to allow for use on human food crops, and they are not available to the public. Decker and Walters were recently recognized for their work by the Kansas City Environmental Management Commission. ////////////////////////////////// Here is the story from 1999 on radioactivity in Livermore Park California - due to sludge March 3, 1999 news ON GUARD: ENVIRONMENT Plutonium park Hot soil sparks debate about leaks at Livermore plant By Jeff St. John FIVE YEARS AGO the federal Environmental Protection Agency ran some tests on soil from a Livermore park. The agency wasn't worried that the park was contaminated; EPA staffers expected to find normal levels of radiation and planned to compare the soil with samples taken from the grounds of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a quarter-mile away. But the tests showed that Big Trees Park's soil had unusually high levels of plutonium. Late last year the lab discovered the levels were even higher. Now area residents, the EPA, and the lab are arguing over where the radiation came from. The latest test turned up plutonium in levels up to 770 times higher than normal. The EPA says that's not high enough for the agency to clean up the park, which sits between an apartment complex and the Arroyo Seco Elementary School. Children walk across the park on their way to and from school, play in the sandbox, and eat at nearby picnic areas. EPA Superfund project manager Kathy Setian said she told parents of Arroyo Seco students that plutonium levels are safe. Livermore parks superintendent Jerry Ingledu told the Bay Guardian his office has not received a single call about the contamination. But local citizens group Tri-Valley Citizens Against a Radioactive Environment (CARES) says the plutonium is a sign that the plutonium plant at LLNL is leaking. CARES members want the lab to determine the source and course of the spreading irradiation. Lab representatives say that the contamination can be traced to a single spill more than 30 years ago and that no further tests need to be done. The accident occurred in 1967, when a half gram of plutonium leaked from LLNL into the municipal sewage system. The plutonium ended up in a sewage system treatment center, where it was mixed with sludge; from 1967 to the early '70s, it was given to the public for use as fertilizer. Bert Heffner, environmental community relations manager at the lab, told us recent tests show trees in the park were fertilized with this sludge by an "unknown resident," accounting for the plutonium contamination. CARES executive director Marylia Kelley says the lab's explanation doesn't hold up. She told us that most of the plutonium was found in the top 20 inches of soil and that a 1995 test found the highest levels of plutonium in treeless areas of the park -- making it unlikely the plutonium was introduced by tree fertilizer decades ago. "By positing the 'unknown resident' hypothesis, the lab has a political motivation," Kelley said. "They want to link it to a discrete action in the past and not look at the plutonium plant that currently has 880 pounds of this stuff." Kelley thinks there's another culprit: broken or out-of-date air filters at the lab. CARES filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Energy last November to uncover a report suggesting that many of the air filters used to prevent plutonium from escaping into the atmosphere may be unfit. The report, by LLNL hazards control scientist Werner Bergman, states that there are no standards requiring filters to be changed on a regular basis -- so the lab has used some filters for more than 30 years. Gordon Guenterberg, an engineer at the plutonium facility, told the Bay Guardian that the filtration system is tested weekly and has multiple backups in case of accidents. He acknowledged that the lab only replaces filters when they are damaged or contaminated and that many of the lab's filters are more than 20 years old. Kelley says worn-out filters could have allowed the release of plutonium into the air, where it might have landed on trees. During rains, it could have been washed down into the soil, contaminating the top 20 inches and spreading to the treeless areas. LLNL spokesperson Heffner told us the lab monitors plutonium levels in the air released from the facility. "We have never had a release equal to the values at Big Trees Park," he said. The federal Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry has organized a team to study possible ways plutonium could have reached the park. CARES is a member of the team, but the group will consider leaving if the research doesn't become more inclusive. According to Kelley, the ATSDR has recently stopped funding state public health consultations that have been a crucial part of the investigation. "The process has noticeably become less responsive and more corrupt," Kelley said. A public meeting regarding LLNL's proposals for cleanup of the lab site takes place March 18, 6-8 p.m., Tracy Public Library, 20 E. Eaton, Lincoln Park, Tracy. (925) 443-7148. http://www.sfbg.com/News/33/22/OnGuard/environment.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 15:22:04 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 15:22:04 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Food processors' spraying leaves west Michigan wells contaminated In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://www.freep.com/article/20090809/NEWS05/908090453 How Groundwater Gets Contaminated: http://www.freep.com/uploads/pdfs/2009/08/0809%20GROUNDWATER%20dp.pdf August 9, 2009 Food processors' spraying leaves west Michigan wells contaminated But erasing water woes a tough task BY TINA LAM FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER Part 1 of 2 FENNVILLE -- John Dekker feels like he's camping out in his own home. He showers with bottled water and drags his laundry to a Laundromat. He can't sell his house without disclosing its glaring flaw -- his well is contaminated. Neighbor Kari Craton's fingernails turned orange; her appliances were destroyed. Diana Bennett's garden is useless. Some 50 families live near a plume of groundwater contaminated with metals that spread from the local Birds Eye processing plant. At a nearby Minute Maid juice plant, there's another plume. In rural west Michigan, food processors have sprayed so much wastewater onto fields that heavy metals seeped into groundwater, contaminating wells. State officials have known of the polluting for at least a decade but, residents complain, moved slowly. The list of tainted sites keeps growing. And the contamination plumes continue to spread as the Department of Environmental Quality and companies argue behind closed doors over what must be done. Frustrated residents say they're bearing the costs -- altered lives and fear of the water that pours from their taps -- even as state and industry officials say there's no acute health threat. "You're living with all these problems, but you can't get out," Craton said. ? PDF: See how groundwater gets contaminated. ? COMPANY RESPONSES: Some offered statements about the contamination problem. Worried residents want help On the wall of the family business is a collage of photos and awards Dick and Rita Pfister's son earned in his too-brief life. He died at age 21 of gastric cancer, a disease his parents were told was highly unusual for someone his age. The Pfisters don't know whether there is a connection between his death and their home's metal-poisoned well -- with water that got so dark, they couldn't see the bottom of the tub when they filled it. What they do know is that juice maker Welch Foods, which sprayed wastewater on the fields across from their home for decades, knew about the tainted water as early as 1980. After their son's death in 1999, the couple found in state records a 1980 report by a consultant to Welch noting contamination in some nearby wells, including theirs. The report said the wells should be replaced. "No one told us," Dick Pfister said. It was not until 2006, three years after signing an agreement with the state to fix the problem, that a Welch official showed up on their doorstep, offering to replace the Pfisters' well. A Welch spokeswoman declined to comment but said the company is working closely with the Department of Environmental Quality and is addressing problems with wells as they arise. Recent offers of help In agricultural towns across west Michigan, residents have found company representatives at their doors or notices of groundwater contamination in their mailboxes in the last few years, even though records show the companies and state regulators have known much longer about the problem. The state says residents don't face any acute health dangers, but the long-term risks are uncertain. Industry officials say they are working with state environmental officials. The wells are contaminated because food processors sprayed untreated wastewater onto farm fields, a common and accepted practice for decades. The theory was that the wastewater would restore nutrients in soil and would be filtered as it percolated into groundwater. But scientists have determined in the last decade that too much fruit and vegetable waste on soil strips out oxygen, allowing naturally occurring metals and arsenic in the soil to leach into groundwater. Some streams have been contaminated, killing fish. Tainted groundwater also moves into wells, destroying water softeners, washers, dishwashers and plumbing. It causes orange fingernails and sick pets, residents say. More worrisome to them are what they see as unexplained tumors, illnesses and even deaths. No health studies have been done to assess whether the contaminants are to blame. "Boiled eggs turn black inside the shell," said Kari Craton of Fennville, whose well has been replaced twice because of contamination from the local Birds Eye plant. "If it can get inside an eggshell, what do our insides look like?" In Fennville, some affected wells have 40 times as much iron as other areas in town. 'It's a two-edged sword'\ Agriculture is the state's No. 2 industry, bringing in more than $63 billion last year. Firms that freeze, can and dry foods from asparagus to cherries employ thousands of workers. Most food processors, which buy local farmers' crops, use the same spraying methods. Changing decades-old practices and repairing the damage is expensive. And times are tough. "It's a two-edged sword," said Terry Morrison, director of the Michigan Food Processors Association. Said Eric Chatterson, a DEQ official who handles contaminated sites: "This is a very widespread problem, and some of these plumes cover several square miles. We're trying to deal with them as fast as we can." He said the state must protect its groundwater and follow the law, but it doesn't want to put processors out of business. The state has brought enforcement actions against more than a dozen firms for contaminating groundwater and collected more than $400,000 in fines. It's investigating more sites -- there could be more than 30. The DEQ pushes companies to change their practices, investigate the contamination and provide residents with new wells or city water. But that can take years and involve long legal battles. A Free Press review of state records found investigations of suspected contamination have dragged out for years. Companies denied responsibility, failed to meet cleanup deadlines and violated state law with leaks, spills and illegal dumping of fruit waste, records show. The DEQ negotiates agreements with companies in secret, without public input. At no site has groundwater been cleaned up. Whether that will ever happen is doubtful, DEQ officials say, since some plumes are so large that cleaning them up would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. A push for action In 2007, Kari Craton was among the first in Fennville to find out from Birds Eye that her well was contaminated. It turned her into an activist, knocking on neighbors' doors and pressing officials for answers. She said she hasn't gotten many. People in about 50 homes just outside town are living with jugs of bottled water, but 150 homes are in the plume's path. Birds Eye, the town's biggest employer, has blamed the contamination plume on other sources, but Chatterson said its spraying is the cause. The state is negotiating behind closed doors with Birds Eye over what to do. In a statement, Birds Eye said it shares residents' concern about groundwater and is working with the DEQ to define the extent of the problem and fix it. It plans to spend $3.5 million for a plant to treat its wastewater. In the meantime, the company is spraying. The City of Fennville hopes to get about $4 million in state funding to upgrade its water system and extend water lines to affected residents, saving Birds Eye the cost. "I don't think taxpayers should be paying to clean up corporate pollution," Craton said. Residents are frustrated with the slow pace. John Dekker, who runs a hot tub business out of his home, said he has thought about walking away. His filters, heat boiler and water softener got so clogged with iron, they don't work. "It's so tiring dealing with this," he said. Craton begged environmental activist Erin Brockovich to get involved. Brockovich came to town this spring, and her law firm has announced it will file a group lawsuit on residents' behalf. No acute risk, state says State officials have told the residents of all these towns there is no acute health risk, despite tests showing metals, arsenic and lead above drinking water standards. A 2007 study by state health officials in Sturgis -- where Abbott Laboratories' spraying contaminated groundwater with metals -- said if wells are replaced, there is no current exposure and no immediate hazard. But the study said it was unknown whether past exposure had hurt health and noted that pregnant women and children were at greater risk. "It's a cop-out to say there's no acute hazard," said Dr. Michael Harbut, a toxicologist at the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute in Royal Oak. "Asbestos contamination is not acute, either. People don't die acutely of toxins." Toxins do damage over long periods, he said. Harbut said various illnesses can be caused by too much arsenic, iron and manganese, from Parkinson's disease to liver damage and cancers. "No 21-year-old randomly dies of gastric cancer," he said. "This makes me mad. If my family lived in a place where the water contained arsenic and metals exceeding federal drinking water standards, I'd be camping out on the front steps of the state Capitol." A law firm in Traverse City has sued several cherry and blueberry processors on behalf of residents faced with groundwater contamination and overpowering odors from the companies' waste. "I grew up here," said lawyer Michael Grant, who represented residents in several suits. "I don't want us to lose our cherries or blueberries. But these are choices these companies make. They're cutting corners." New well, bad water In Lawton, Welch drilled the Pfisters a new well, but its water was bad, too. The DEQ ordered the company to put in another new well this summer. Welch also installed new plumbing, hot water and a new reverse osmosis system, all ruined earlier. But Dick Pfister said he doesn't yet trust that his water is OK. And a neighbor two doors down is starting to have black water and impenetrable orange slime in plumbing, the same symptoms the Pfisters once had. Under a DEQ permit, Welch is expanding the size of its spray fields to try to spread the waste over a larger area. Pfister said he worries for neighbors. "I think Welch is a good company, but they're doing this cheaply," he said. "They just don't realize what they're doing to people around here." On Monday: Families grapple with effects of illegal dumping. Contact TINA LAM: 313-222-6421 or tlam at freepress.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Company responses: http://www.freep.com/article/20090809/NEWS06/90809005 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 21:47:48 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 21:47:48 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Expert: Plants can absorb chemicals from treated wastewater Message-ID: http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20090806/NEWS01/908060376/Expert--Plants-can-absorb-chemicals-from-treated-wastewater August 6, 2009 Expert: Plants can absorb chemicals from treated wastewater BY TREVOR HUGHES TrevorHughes @coloradoan.com Ecstasy in your putting green? It's more likely than you might think. New research presented Wednesday at CSU shows that plants irrigated with treated wastewater can "take up" chemicals ranging from antibiotics to methamphetamine and ecstasy. University of Arizona professor Charles A. Sanchez is conducting research on the Colorado River, looking into where such chemicals are found and at what levels they can be found in plants irrigated with treated wastewater. Speaking at a Colorado State University forum on emerging contaminants, Sanchez said his tests showed what he considered very low amounts of illicit drugs such as methamphetamine and ecstasy, along with antibiotics, present in crops such as melons, cantaloupe and spinach irrigated with the effluent. "We found a little bit of ecstasy in Bermuda grass," Sanchez said. "We think the risk is negligible." In the South, Bermuda grass is used extensively for lawns and golf courses, in some cases as a way of further cleaning the water before it returns to rivers and streams. Sanchez said his testing from Grand Lake all the way to the Mexican border indicated the amount of illicit drugs in the water is very low, especially once treated wastewater is diluted by the main river. However, he noted certain areas showed a perceptible increase in both meth and ecstasy, particularly the summer waters of Lake Havasu. Sanchez said it?s hard to tell exactly why there?s an increase in the lake during that time, when it?s most popular as a recreational boating destination. ?It comes in June and goes out in September,? said Sanchez, a professor of soil, water and environmental sciences. Fort Collins does not widely use effluent for irrigation, said Steve Comstock, the city?s water reclamation and biosolids manager. Comstock said some effluent is used to irrigate the lawns around the city?s two treatment plants, but that?s it. He said Sanchez?s research builds on what many people in the industry already know. Multiple studies, including on the Poudre River, have shown the presence of everything from caffeine and antibiotics to birth control in treated wastewater. Federal regulations don?t require the removal of such contaminants, but that day is likely coming, Comstock said. ?It?s something that everybody sort of knows that?s on the horizon,? Comstock said. ?The suspicion out there is that this will be regulated before long.? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 23:02:12 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 23:02:12 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> New Superbug - resistant to antibiotics - linked to patients who had surgury abroad Message-ID: A new superbug found in Britain is major concern: Government scientists A new superbug that is resistant to all antibiotics has been brought into Britain by patients having surgery abroad, Government scientists said. By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor Published: 9:00AM BST 08 Aug 2009 A new superbug that is resistant to all antibiotics has been brought into Britain by patients having surgery abroad, Government scientists said. Doctors are urged to be vigilent for a new bug that has arriving in Britain with patients who have travelled to India and Pakistan for cosmetic surgery or organ transplants and is now circulating here. So far there have been 22 cases in 17 hospitals Britain and the Health Protection Agency has said its emergence here is a 'major concern'. The HPA has found the enzyme that destroys antibiotics in patients with infections caused by E.coli and other bacteria. The enzyme, called New Delhi Metallo-1, has so far been found attached to bacteria that has caused urinary tract infections and respiratory infections. It is of particular concern because it can jump from one strain of bacteria to another meaning it could attach itself to more dangerous infections that can cause severe illnesses and blood poisoning making them almost impossible to treat. The NDM-1 enzyme destroys a group of antibiotics called carbapenems which are mainly used in Britain for severe infections and are tightly controlled because they are one of the few groups of antibiotics that remain useful against bacteria that have already developed resistance to the commonly used drugs. Experts at the HPA are now investigating old antibiotics that have fallen out of use, new ones in development and drugs used in other countries to see if any work against bacteria producing the NDM-1 enzyme. Two have been found that are of limited use against the new bug. Dr David Livermore, director of the HPA's Centre for Infection's Antibiotics Resistance and Monitoring Reference Laboratory, said: "Carbapenems have had to be used more and more as bacteria have become resistant to antibiotics. Therefore it is a worry when we see carbapenem resistance emerging. Increasingly over the last year we have seen small numbers that can destroy carbapenems. "Because the enzyme can move from bacteria to bacteria the fear has to be that it would get into a strain that is good at causing severe infections. I would be very concerned if it got into an E.coli strain that was associated with severe infection. "That is what happened with MRSA, in the 1980s in Britain they were not successful strains and did not cause severe infections, but by the 1990s it caused severe infections and became a very major public health issue." Dr Livermore said all patients in hospital should ensure staff and visitors wash their hands to prevent the spread of any infection and anyone who has had treatment abroad should ensure their doctors here know about it. He also urged anyone travelling abroad for medical treatment to ask about the infection risks and possible resistance. Antibiotics are widely available to buy without prescription in India and Pakistan and this has meant hospital doctor there have had to resort to more powerful drugs to clear infections, in turn leading to more resistance developing. With increasing medical tourism between Britain and Asia, 'more and more' antibiotic resistant strains will be imported into this country, he warned. Similar carbapenem destroying bugs have also been imported by patients having treatment in Cyprus, Israel and Greece. One British patient, who developed a bloodstream infection with an E coli that produced NDM-1 enzyme had received treatment for cancer in both India and the UK; two others had undergone cosmetic surgery in India and others had received renal or liver transplantation in Pakistan. However ten cases in Britain had not reported any foreign medical treatment. A bulletin from the HPA said: "Treatment presents major challenges. Most isolates with NDM-1 enzyme are resistant to all standard intravenous antibiotics for treatment of severe infections. "Great care should be taken to prevent onward transmission. Comprehensive infection control advice can be provided by the HPA's Laboratory of Healthcare-Associated Infection but key aspects include isolation of sources and screening of cases and close hospital contacts." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/5978455/A-new-superbug-found-in-Britain-is-major-concern-Government-scientists.html ....................... UK Health Alert: http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1248854045473 National Resistance Alert 3 ADDENDUM Carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in the UK: NDM (New Delhi Metallo-)b -lactamase: repeated importation from Indian subcontinent Background In January 2009 we issued a National Resistance Alert concerning carbapenemases in UK Enterobacteriaceae. This followed consultation with ARHAI and stressed: (i) the growing number of producer isolates referred to the HPA?s Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring & Reference Laboratory (ARMRL) (8 in all years to 2007; ultimately 21 in 2008); (ii) the diversity of these, variously with metallo (VIM or IMP), KPC and OXA-48 enzymes and (iii) that many producer isolates were from patients previously hospitalised in Greece, Turkey and Israel. This addendum is issued: (i) because the number of referred producers continues to increase sharply (>40 so far in 2009) and (ii) because a novel enzyme, NDM-1 (New Delhi Metallo b-Lactamase) is increasingly dominant. NDM-1 is strongly linked to India and Pakistan and many of the UK cases have recent medical exposure in the Indian-subcontinent. Recognition of risk patients and prevention of transmission in the UK is critical, since most producers are resistant to ALL reliable antibiotics. Basis for alert During 2008 ARMRL investigated 17 referred Enterobacteriaceae with known carbapenemases, as detailed in National Resistance Alert 3. We also received 4 isolates that had a metallo -carbapenemase phenotype (i.e. strong EDTA/imipenem synergy), but lacked known carbapenemase genes. We have since identified their enzyme as NDM-1, a type first described in 2008 in a patient transferred from India to Sweden: he had an infection with NDM -1+ K. pneumoniae, and gut carriage of E. coli with the enzyme. Up to 20/6/2009 we received 17 further producers . The total of 21 UK producers compris e K. pneumoniae (14), E. coli (4), Enterobacter spp., (1) and C. freundii (2), from 18 patients and 16 hospitals scattered across England, with one in Scotland. NDM-1 has become the most frequent carbapenemase in isolates referred to ARMRL, and the most widely scattered. Even when producers belong to the same species they are diverse in strain type with only one possible transmission, involving two patients. Case follow-up is ongoing but, strikingly, 12/18 patients have names linked to the Indian subcontinent and at least 8 have had medical contact in India or Pakistan. They include one patient dividing treatment for haematological malignancy between India and the UK and another who developed a wound infection following cosmetic surgery in India. Denominators are weak, but surveys co-ordinated by Prof Walsh at the University of Cardiff, Wales suggest that NDM-1 is widely distributed in India and one of ARMRL?s collaborators has found producer E. coli in Karachi, Pakistan. Work by Prof Walsh?s group suggests promiscuous plasmid transfer as a mode of dissemination, and the diversity of producers referred to ARMRL supports this. Allowing patterns of human travel and migration, and the many UK residents who receive medical treatment in India, we believe that UK healthcare will be repeatedly challenged by imported producers. These organisms mostly are resistant to ALL antibiotics except polymyxins and, less consistently, tigecycline. The activity of obscure agents (fosfomycin, arbekacin and isepamicin) and novel compounds is under investigation, but none is readily available for therapy. In these circumstances it is vital to detect producers and to prevent their o nward transmission. Actions advised ? Be alert to the increase in carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae, and the growing importance of NDM -1 enzyme ? Recognise exposure to healthcare systems in India and Pakistan as additional major risk factors for infection or colonization with multiresistant, carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae ? Refer ALL carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae to ARMRL, except (i) Proteus spp. and Morganella spp. with borderline resistance only to imipenem (common in these genera) and (ii) E. cloacae with intermediate resistance to ertapenem only, as these are generally just derepressed for AmpC. NDM production will be investigated promptly. ? Patients infected with producers should be isolated to prevent onward transmission in hospitals; carriage in the patient?s faecal flora should be examined for producers of the same or different species; similar screening of close unit contacts should be strongly considered. Queries to: David Livermore or Neil Woodford, Antibiotic Resistance Monitoring and Reference Laboratory, Centre for Infections, HPA Colindale. Tel 020-8327-6511/7223 or 7255; david.livermore at hpa.org.uk or neil.woodford at hpa.org.uk; queries on relevant infection control to Barry Cookson, Laboratory of Healthcare-Associated Infection, 0208-327-7249 barry.cookson at hpa.org.uk ? Numbers of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae referred to ARMRL continue to increase sharply ? Many recently referred carbapenemase producers have NDM (New Delhi Metallo)-b-lactamase ? Many patients with NDM-1 positive isolates have recent medical contact in India or Pakistan, where the enzyme is accumulating swiftly, probably via efficient plasmid transfer ? Patterns of human travel and migration mean that repeated future challenge of the UK healthcare system by producers of NDM-1 enzyme is to be expected ? Most producers are resistant to ALL antibiotics except polymyxins and tigecycline and may pose a serious treatment challenge in severe infections ? Vigilance and good infection control are essential to minimise transmission and accumulation in the UK From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 22:29:34 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 22:29:34 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Tiny Troubles - Nanoparticles are Changing Everything Message-ID: http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_56382.shtml Science/Nature Tiny Troubles. How Nanoparticles Are Changing Everything From Our Sunscreen to Our Supplements By Carole Bass E-Magazine Monday, Jul 20, 2009 Nanoparticles are in over 800 everyday products?but their health effects are not yet known. It?s a beautiful summer day. You pull on your stain-resistant cargo shorts and odor-resistant hiking socks, gulp down an energy-boosting supplement, slather yourself with sunscreen and head out for a ramble in the woods. Are you poisoning yourself? When you get home, you jump in the shower and toss your clothes in the wash. Are you poisoning the environment? Maybe. Your sunscreen, energy drink and high-tech clothing may be among the 800-plus consumer products made with nanomaterials: those manufactured at the scale of atoms and molecules. Sunscreen that turns clear on the skin contains titanium dioxide, an ordinary UV-blocker in extraordinarily small particles. Odor-eating socks are made with atoms of germ-killing silver. Supplement makers boast of amazing health effects from swallowing nanosolutions that are completely untested for effectiveness or safety. And that stain-repellant clothing? The manufacturer won?t even tell you what nanomaterials are in it. The problem is not just that you, the consumer, don?t know what?s in the products you use. The much bigger problem is that at the nanoscale, common substances behave in uncommon ways. And nobody?not even the world?s leading nanoscientists?knows what nanoparticles do inside the body or in the environment. Nanotechnology, a fast-growing global industry, is essentially unregulated. Advocates and independent scientists agree that we need to get ahead of the risks before it?s too late. Some call for a moratorium on the riskiest nanoproducts. Some say we just need more research, and more protection for workers in the meantime. All are worried about unleashing a powerful new technology that could have vast unintended consquences. Nanomaterials are in food, cosmetics, clothing, toys and scores of other everyday products. Yet when it comes to trying to get a handle on them, we can?t answer the most basic questions. What companies are using nanomaterials, and where? What kinds, and in what amounts? How much of the potentially hazardous stuff is escaping into the air, water and soil? Into our food and drinks? Nobody knows. At a February workshop on what research is needed to better understand nanorisks, speaker after speaker presented questions without answers. Rutgers University environmental scientist Paul Lioy, assigned to talk about human exposures to nanomaterials, was especially blunt. ?This is basically virgin territory,? he said. ?The fact that it?s virgin territory is not good for the field, and it should be fixed really quick.? Big Benefits, Big Risks? Nanomaterials are not new. Some exist naturally, and others result from combustion?like the ultrafine particles in diesel exhaust that have been linked to respiratory and heart diseases. What?s new is nanotechnology, the ability to manufacture and manipulate minuscule materials into forms such as quantum dots, spherical buckyballs, and cylindrical carbon nanotubes. These engineered nanomaterials take on unusual properties: changing color, for example, or becoming electrically conductive, or penetrating cell walls. And they have many uses. Carbon nanotubes, or CNTs?made by rolling up sheets of graphite just one atom thick?are extremely light and strong; they show up in high-end tennis rackets and bicycle frames. Nanosilver is used as an antimicrobial agent in everything from paint to toothpaste to teddy bears. Nanometal oxides are blended into ceramics and coatings, making them more durable. While there?s no universal definition, the ?nano? moniker generally covers materials between one and 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter, or between 50,000 and 100,000 times thinner than a human hair. Nanotech offers enormous potential benefits. Medical researchers are investigating ways to use nanomaterials to target tumors and then deliver tiny amounts of drugs directly inside the cancer cells, sparing the healthy cells. Possible green tech applications include cheaper, more efficient solar panels and water-filtration systems, energy-saving batteries and lighter vehicles that use less fuel. That?s the upside. But exciting new wonder materials often reveal a dark side, too. Asbestos?now synonymous with bankrutpcy-inducing lawsuits and slow, painful death?was once seen as a miraculous fireproofing agent that would save millions of lives. Much of its damage could have been avoided if industry and government had heeded the ample danger signs. Now, early research on the potential hazards of nanotech is producing danger signs of its own. Workers handling nanomaterials face the biggest risks. But there are concerns for consumers, too, especially with products?like cosmetics, food and supplements?that go directly on or in the body. And with potentially toxic nanomaterials washing down the drain and into the water and soil, there?s reason to worry about environmental damage as well. Yet studies on nanotech?s downside are a mere nanospeck compared to the research that?s being done on how this technology can benefit humanity?and corporate profits. Of $1.5 billion in federal nano spending each year, only between 1% and 2.5% goes toward studying environmental, health and safety risks. Worse, there?s no national strategy for deciding what questions need to be answered, or what to do with those answers as they arrive. Occupational Hazards Since the 17th century, when Italian physician Bernardino Ramazzini pioneered the field of occupational medicine, researchers have looked to the workplace for advance warning of new illnesses. From janitors blinded by ammonia fumes to chimney sweeps who absorbed cancer-causing soot through their skin, workers get sick first and most acutely because of their intense, daily toxic exposures. That?s why much of the still-sparse nano health and safety research has focused on the possible hazards of working with nanomaterials. Scientists can?t expose workers to potential toxins and watch to see if they keel over. But if employers cooperate, researchers can find out what materials workers are using, in what amounts and forms, and under what conditions. Then they can simulate those exposures with lab animals. Some studies find little or no risk. Others are alarming. Last year, British researchers reported that when long, straight carbon nanotubes?shaped like asbestos fibers?were injected into mice, they caused the same kind of damage as asbestos. Of course, workers wouldn?t ordinarily stick themselves with a needleful of CNTs. But a follow-up study this year, by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), found that when mice inhaled CNTs, the tiny tubes migrated from their lungs to the surrounding tissue?the very spot where asbestos causes the rare cancer known as mesothelioma. One reason nanomaterials can cause trouble is that they are small enough to evade the body?s defenses. In a University of Rochester study of the accidental nanoparticles known as ultrafine pollution, they bypassed the protective blood-brain barrier and slipped directly into the brain?s olfactory bulb. Other research demonstrates that nanomaterials can penetrate the deepest part of the lungs. From there, they cross into the bloodstream and various organs. Based on evidence like this, the European Union?s occupational health and safety agency issued an expert report in March, citing nanoparticles as the number-one emerging risk to workers. In the U.S., NIOSH has issued a guidance document urging employers to avoid exposing workers to nanomaterials?for example, by enclosing equipment and using ventilation to reduce dust and fumes. But NIOSH has no regulatory power; it can only suggest. The Pig-Pen Effect ?You?re producing a personal cloud of exposure,? Paul Lioy warned. ?Every time you breathe. Every time you move. If the materials you?re wearing have [nano]materials that can be released, they will be released. It?s basically the Pig-Pen effect. Lioy, the Rutgers environmental scientist, was speaking theoretically. His audience was fellow scientists, gathered in Bethesda, Maryland, for a workshop sponsored by the federal government. The workshop?s title: ?Human & Environmental Exposure Assessment of Nanomaterials.? Lioy?s assignment: Talk about the need for research to ?characterize exposure to the general population from industrial processes and industrial and consumer products containing nanomaterials.? His message: There is no research on whether and how the general population is exposed to nanomaterials. Searching the scholarly literature, Lioy?s associates ?spent hours looking for data ... and found nothing,? he said. While workers are on the front lines of nanoexposure, Lioy cautioned against ignoring consumer exposures. ?We are all in contact with it?300 million of us, if we use products that have nanoparticles,? he declared. And while nanomaterials that are embedded in a hard surface like a computer keyboard are probably not a big worry, clothing and cosmetics might be a different story, he said. That?s where his comparison to Pig-Pen, the Peanuts character forever surrounded by a cloud of dirt, comes in: the idea that every time we move, nanoparticles might come loose from our moisturizer or our stain-resistant togs. Noting that ?a lot of nanoparticle uses are terrific,? Lioy said he doesn?t want society to do without. As scientists do the necessary studies, ?I think a lot of issues will go away,? he said. ?I just don?t want unintended consequences.? Down the Drain Cyndee Gruden is getting the poop on nano-pollution?literally. One of the main environmental concerns about nanomaterials is what happens when they wash out of clothing, hair or skin and go down the drain. Do they harm aquatic life? Do they interfere with wastewater treatment? Gruden, a civil engineering professor at the University of Toledo in Ohio, is tackling part of that last question by looking at the effects of two nanometals?titanium dioxide and zinc oxide, used in sunscreens, paint and other products?on bacteria. Metals ?can be toxic to microorganisms,? she notes. ?In fact, that?s specifically what they?re for? in consumer products: to inhibit mold, mildew and other nastiness. But when nanometals make their way to a sewage treatment plant, Gruden worries that they might harm the beneficial bacteria that break down what?s delicately known in the business as ?biosolids.? Her preliminary findings, which she presented at a meeting of the American Chemical Society (an academic group, not an industry organization) in March, are mixed. Nano-titanium dioxide damaged bacteria, causing cell walls to break at ?relatively low concentrations,? similar to what you might see at a sewage treatment plant, Gruden says in an interview. But ?in terms of function, what does that mean? Are the bugs able to do what they?re supposed to do?? To answer that question, she added some biosolids to her test tubes and measured how much methane the bacteria produced as they digested for five days. The titanium dioxide didn?t seem to slow the bugs down; in fact, methane production actually increased. But when Gruden added nano-zinc oxide, gas production slowed down. She?s running more experiments this summer to see what happens when the bacteria are exposed to the bugs for a full 30 days. ?The take-home message for me is, the behavior of these particles is very complex,? Gruden says. ?When you take a nanoparticle and put it into the environment, you have to know how it?s going to behave. And we don?t.? One metal Gruden didn?t look at is nanosilver, widely used as a microbe-killer. The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts in Washington, D.C., maintains an inventory of more than 800 consumer products advertised as using nanotechnology. Silver is by far the most frequently identified material. In an experiment publicized last year, Arizona State University graduate student Troy Benn bought nanosilver-containing socks off the Internet and simulated washing them in jars of water. He found that, for several brands, most or all of the silver disappeared in just a few washings. Silver has been used to kill bacteria since ancient times, when the Greeks found that wine stayed fresh longer in vessels lined with the precious metal. It?s potent enough that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates silver as a pesticide. Which raises the question: What does nanosilver do to the ?good bugs? downstream, at the sewage treatment plant and elsewhere? In 2006, a trade organization of wastewater treatment operators was concerned enough about a new silver-ion-emitting Samsung washing machine to pressure the EPA to include such equipment under its pesticide rules. The EPA responded by cracking down, not only on the washer but also on manufacturers of products advertised to contain nanosilver, including a line of supposedly sanitary computer peripherals. Separately, a coalition of consumer, health, and environmental groups filed a petition last year asking the EPA to impose a moratorium on nanosilver products until more safety research is done. In addition, the EPA has awarded a grant to Arizona State researchers to investigate interactions between various kinds of nanomaterials and wastewater biosolids. Oversight or Overlooked? In the U.S., the EPA has emerged as the lead agency on nano oversight. But that?s not saying much. It is wrestling with the possible risks of nanomaterials, but so far has taken almost no action to regulate them. In a voluntary Nanoscale Materials Stewardship Program, the EPA asked companies to submit information about what nanomaterials they?re using. Very few did, and even the companies that participated withheld large amounts of data as business secrets. This March, the EPA began requiring manufacturers of carbon nanotubes to file pre-manufacturing notices under the Toxic Substances Control Act. California is requiring carbon nanotube makers to share their environmental, health and safety test data with the state, and is considering imposing the same mandate on makers of nanometal oxides, like the ones Gruden is testing. But the EPA is not the only federal agency with responsibility for nanomaterials. Cosmetics, sunscreen, and food and beverages?which fall under the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)?make up roughly 30% of PEN?s consumer products inventory. Yet the FDA is poorly equipped to ensure the safety of nano-containing dietary supplements, according to a 2008 report by two former agency officials. (Friends of the Earth has urged mandatory labeling of nanofoods and a moratorium on nano-containing cosmetics until they?re shown to be safe.) The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is responsible for protecting workers, has not even begun to work on nano rules. A former EPA official, J. Clarence Davies, proposes merging all these agencies and more into a new Department of Environmental and Consumer Protection. A ?scientific agency with a strong oversight component,? it would cover products, pollution, workplace health and safety, climate change and health effects of nanotechnology as well as other technologies, Davies writes in his April 2009 report, ?Oversight of Next Generation Nanotechnology.? Outside the U. S., regulators are taking a somewhat more precautionary approach. Still, governments have adopted very few nano-specific rules to protect people or the environment. But there are bright spots. At Rice University in Houston, Texas, for example, Vicki Colvin and her colleagues are trying to engineer nanomaterials that are safe from the get-go, rather than looking for ways to minimize harm from nanotoxins. But fears abound that the teeny genie is escaping from its bottle. The asbestos parallel causes particular concern?prompting the Australian Council of Trade Unions, for example, to call for that country to adopt nano regulations by year?s end. At the Bethesda workshop in February, Harvard industrial hygienist Robert Herrick advocated an all-out effort to gather information about nano exposures and possible related illnesses. The asbestos industry could have undertaken a similar effort in the 1930s, he noted. Instead, industry execs decided to keep the subject quiet. If they had gone the other way, Herrick wondered, ?how different would history be?? CAROLE BASS, a journalist, writes about the environment, workplace health, legal affairs and other subjects. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 11 12:23:29 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:23:29 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> EPA knows about antibiotic resistance in sludge - now playing dumb Message-ID: It is an EPA publication circa 1982, demonstrating that EPA is well aware that sewer plants produce antibiotic resistance. The agency has been playing dumb for years, but here is the smoking gun. Viable but Non-culturable Coliform (VBNC)---does use of UV radiation make surviving pathogens invisible to sta... APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, Feb. 1982, p. 371-377 Vol. 43, No. 2 0099-2240/82/020371-07$02.00/0 Effect of UV Light Disinfection on Antibiotic-Resistant Coliforms in Wastewater Effluents MARK C. MECKESt Wastewater Research Division, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 Received 15 June 1981/Accepted 13 October 1981 http://thewatchers.us/EPA/1982-Meckes.pdf ............................................... To read the complete report in an easy read format: http://thewatchers.us/EPA/1982-Meckes.pdf APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, Feb. 1982, p. 371-377 Vol. 43, No. 2 0099-2240/82/020371-07$02.00/0 Effect of UV Light Disinfection on Antibiotic-Resistant Coliforms in Wastewater Effluents MARK C. MECKES Wastewater Research Division, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 Received 15 June 1981/Accepted 13 October 1981 Total coliforms and total coliforms resistant to streptomycin, tetracycline, or chloramphenicol were isolated from filtered activated sludge effluents before and after UV light irradiation. Although the UV irradiation effectively disinfected the wastewater effluent, the percentage of the total surviving coliform population resistant to tetracycline or chloramphenicol was significantly higher than the percentage of the total coliform population resistant to those antibiotics before UV irradiation. This finding was attributed to the mechanism of R-factormediated resistance to tetracycline. No significant difference was noted for the percentage of the surviving total coliform population resistant to streptomycin before or after UV irradiation. Multiple drug resistance patterns of 300 total coliform isolates revealed that 82% were resistant to two or more antibiotics. Furthermore, 46% of these isolates were capable of transferring antibiotic resistance to a sensitive strain of Escherichia coli. In 1959, Watanabe (31) discovered that some Escherichia coli strains could transfer antibiotic resistance to antibiotic-sensitive strains of Shigella spp. Subsequent research has demonstrated that bacteria carrying transmissible R-factors are responsible for the spread of multiple antibiotic resistance among members of the Enterobacteriaceae (such as E. coli, Salmonella typhi, and Shigella dysenteriae) Aeromonas and Yersinia species (4), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (21), and Vibrio cholerae (34). Transmission of R-factors in the Enterobacteriaceae usually occurs by conjugation, which involves a specialized structure called the "sex pilus" and requires cell-to-cell contact or cellpilus- cell contact. The ability and the efficiency of different bacterial strains to donate or receive R-factors varies (8). Transmission of R-factors by conjugation is rapid and may spread rapidly among bacteria (31). When bacteria which carry transmissible Rfactors (R+ bacteria) are ingested by a human host, the R-factors may transfer into commonly occurring bacteria of the gastrointestinal tract (32). These organisms may subsequently transfer this resistance to pathogenic organisms, resulting in reduced efficacy of antimicrobial chemotherapy in the event of an infection. In vivo studies have shown that when individuals carrying R+ bacteria are subjected to antibiotic therat Present address: Defense Property Disposal Service, Battle Creek, MI 49016. py, these organisms flourish and transfer their resistance to other bacteria (25). >From late 1968 to early 1981, Central America was afflicted by an R+ S. dysenteriae pandemic (11). During the first year of the epidemic, in Guatemala alone, 12,500 deaths were recorded. The causative organism was spread mainly by contaminated water and carried resistance to streptomycin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, and sulfadiazine. Other outbreaks involving R+ pathogens have been reported elsewhere (1, 24). Several researchers have pointed out that wastewater, treated or untreated, is a primary contributor of bacteria to the aquatic ecosystem (12, 16, 17, 20, 27, 29). Studies have been conducted which demonstrate that significant numbers of multiple drug-resistant coliforms occur in rivers (17), bays (9), bathing beaches (28), and coastal canals (13). Waters contaminated by bacteria capable of transferring drug resistance are of great concern since there is the potential for transfer of antibiotic resistance to a pathogenic species. Available information shows that conventional wastewater purification methods without disinfection are not adequate for removal of antibiotic- resistant bacteria (14, 15, 29). Wastewater disinfection is, therefore, the only means whereby communities can limit the number of antibiotic- resistant bacteria in the water environment since it seems unlikely that antibiotic chemotherapy will be reduced. Historically, chlorination has been used in the United States for wastewater disinfection (33). 371 APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL. However, chlorine residuals have been shown to be toxic to aquatic wildlife (3). An alternative method of disinfection is to use UV light irradiation at 253.7 nm. UV disinfection does not produce a toxic residual and is an efficient bactericide (23). Studies have been conducted which indicate that UV light can be used effectively for disinfection of municipal secondary wastewater effluents (18, 26). One of these studies has projected that UV disinfection of activated sludge effluents may be the most cost effective alternative to chlorination (26). Several communities in the United States have selected UV light for disinfection of their effluent wastewater. Therefore, the effect of UV light disinfection on antibiotic-resistant coliforms in municipal wastewater effluents should be ascertained to determine whether the use of this disinfection technique will significantly reduce the ratio of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to antibiotic-sensitive bacteria entering receiving waters from wastewater treatment facilities. This study was designed to determine the effects of UV light disinfection on antibiotic-resistant total coliforms in municipal effluents. MATERIALS AND METHODS UV irradiation of filtered activated sludge effluents. On the day of each experiment, clarified activated sludge effluent was collected ahead of the disinfection stage at the Fairfield Wastewater Treatment Plant operated by the City of Fairfield, Ohio. This plant (6,000,000 gallons per day) uses conventional activated sludge after primary clarification for treatment of domestic wastewater. After collection, the effluent was trucked to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency R. A. Taft Laboratory Pilot Plant, where the effluent was pumped through a mixed media pressure filter, a Brooks Sho- Rate roto-meter, and a UV sterilizer (Aquafine model DP-10-2U, Burbank, Calif.). The filtration system was used to limit the suspended solids of the secondary effluent. This was necessary to insure the rapid filtration of up to a 500-ml sample through membrane filters for enumeration of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms. The Aquafine UV unit was designed to provide a >99% bactericidal reduction across the unit at maximum rated flow. The unit used for this study had a maximum rated flow capacity of 1.5 gallons (5.68 liters) per min (gpm) on freshwater. The UV dose at this flow rate was 45,000 p.Ws/cm2 as determined by the manufacturer. Since the DP-10-2U sterilizer was designed for sterilization of freshwater, the efficiency of the unit for disinfection of wastewaters was expected to be somewhat less. The DP-10-2U utilized a quartz U-shaped tube of 160 ml (total volume) through which the treated effluent flowed. Two germicidal 8-W lamps (1.5 W total UV output at 254 nm) were positioned on opposing sides of the U-shaped tube such that the greatest distance the light had to travel to penetrate the liquid traversing the tube was 2 in. A polished stainless steel housing surrounded the U-shaped tube and lamp assemblies to provide a reflective surface for better utilization of the available UV light. The dosage of UV light used in these experiments was chosen to provide disinfection as defined by achieving < indicate too few colonies to provide a reliable number and therefore were not used to calculate means. broth and incubating at 35?C overnight. A heavy loopful of each of these mating mixtures was smeared onto MacConkey agar (BBL Microbiology Systems) plates containing 100 ,ug of sodium azide per ml and 20 pLg of the selection antibiotic per ml used to isolate the prospective donor strain. The media used were selective for antibiotic-resistant recombinants of the E. coli K-12 strain since growth of the prospective donor was prevented by sodium azide, and growth of the prospective recipient was prevented by an antibiotic. After incubation at 35?C for 24 h, a single, wellisolated lactose-negative colony was placed in nutrient broth and tested for antibiotic resistance patterns by the above mentioned method to ascertain whether all or part of the resistance pattern was transferred from the donor strain to the recipient strain. Controls were run with donor and recipient strains to assure the validity of the transfer experiments. RESULTS Enumeration of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms. Activated sludge effluents were irradiated at a flow rate of 1.5 gpm, which resulted in a total coliform density below 1,000 total coliforms per 100 ml (Table 1) on all but two of the samples. Similarly, two of the samples after UV treatment resulted in too few coliforms to be detected. The data in Table 1 also show that UV irradiation effectively reduced the number of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms in the activated sludge effluents. Table 2 shows the percentage of antibioticresistant coliforms before and after UV disinfection. Means from Table 2 show that UV irradiation of the effluents resulted in a decrease in the percentage of surviving total coliforms resistant to streptomycin and an increase in the percentage of surviving total coliforms resistant to tetracycline or chloramphenicol. Analysis-of-variance techniques were used to determine the significance of the change in percentage of antibiotic resistance observed in the surviving total coliform population after UV irradiation. The data from the 2 days which TABLE 2. Percentage of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms from effluents before and after UV irradiation % antibiotic-resistant total coliforms' Date Before UV irradiation After UV irradiation (1979) Sm' Ter Cmr Smr Ter Cmr 3/15 57.0 2.8 0.2 41.4 23.8 1.1 3/16 60.9 3.0 0.2 43.0 23.6 1.2 3/27 Indeterminant Indeterminant 3/28 43.1 2.7 0.3 49.9 13.5 2.0 3/29 40.2 2.6 0.3 42.4 10.4 1.6 4/4 37.0 3.3 0.3 Indeterminant 4/5 53.8 5.1 0.1 47.0 11.6 0.6 4/10 47.8 3.0 0.2 46.3 28.7 1.8 4/11 40.9 2.6 0.2 44.4 12.2 1.3 4/12 37.0 2.8 0.2 23.3 7.8 0.6 4/17 42.4 3.6 0.2 41.6 18.9 1.3 4/18 50.4 2.7 0.2 50.8 15.2 1.6 Mean 46.4 3.1 0.2 43.0 16.6 1.3 a Calculated by dividing the number of total coliforms resistant to a specific antibiotic by the number of total coliforms in the same sample and multiplying by 100. Sm, streptomycin; Te, tetracycline; Cm, chloramphenicol. All antibiotics were at 20 ,ug/ml. VOL. 43, 1982 TABLE 3. Analysis of variance on the percentage of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms before and after UV irradiation Resistance to: Svoauriracteioonf Defgrreeeedsomof sSquumareosf sMqeuaarne F Streptomycin Treatment 1 94.178 94.178 1.54 Error 18 1100.514 61.140 Total 19 1194.692 Tetracycline Treatment 1 908.552 908.552 38.07a Error 18 429.61 23.867 Total 19 1338.162 Chloramphenicol Treatment 1 6.050 6.05 55.OOa Error 18 1.978 0.11 Total 19 8.028 a Significant at the 0.01 level. resulted in too few colonies to yield a reliable number were deleted from the analysis. Table 3 shows the results from these tests. The percentages of tetracycline-resistant and chloramphenicol- resistant total coliforms increased significantly after UV irradiation, while there was no significant difference between the percentage of streptomycin-resistant total coliforms present in the effluent before and after UV treatment. Multiple antibiotic-resistant total coliforms. A total of 300 colonies were picked at random from the m-Endo plates containing streptomycin, tetracycline, or chloramphenicol. One-half of these isolates were from effluents sampled before UV irradiation; the rest were from effluents sampled after UV irradiation. Equal numbers of colonies were picked to represent each selection antibiotic used. These isolates were tested for resistance to eight different antibiotics. The most common antibiotic resistance patterns observed for the total coliform isolates are presented in Tables 4, 5, and 6. Of the 300 isolates examined, 55 were resistant to only one of the antibiotics tested. Of these 55 isolates, 25 were resistant to streptomycin, 27 were resistant to tetracycline, and only 3 were resistant to chloramphenicol. These data clearly indicate that the majority of antibioticresistant coliforms from these effluents were resistant to two or more drugs. None of the strains tested showed resistance to colisten, and only one strain was resistant to gentamicin. UV light treatment of the effluent appears to have some effect on the multiple antibiotic resistance patterns observed in total coliform isolates. From effluents before UV treatment of 50 strains isolated on media containing streptomycin, 18 exhibited resistance to three or more antibiotics (Table 4). However, of the 50 strains isolated in the same manner from UV-treated effluents, 24 exhibited resistance to three or more antibiotics. Similarly, the num;4ber of strains exhibiting resistance to three or more antibiotics isolated on media containing tetracycline (Table 5) were 17 and 30, respectively. This apparent selection by UV treatment for multiple antibiotic resistance in total coliform strains was not observed in strains isolated on media containing chloramphenicol (Table 6) because most of these isolates (89/100) exhibited resistance to three or more antibiotics, regardless of irradiation. For certain antibiotic combinations, selection of antibiotic-resistant total coliforms by UV treatment is shown in Table 6 for strains isolated on media containing chloramphenicol. Before UV treatment, the strains exhibiting the Sm Te Cm Am and the Sm Te Cm Km Am resistance TABLE 4. Antibiotic resistance patterns encountered in total coliforms isolated on media containing streptomycin No. of isolatesb (%) from Resistance pattema samples Before UV After UV irradiation irradiation Sm 11 (22) 14 (28) Sm Te 16 (32) 6 (12) Sm Km 2 (4) 1 (2) Sm Am 3 (6) 4 (8) Sm Cr 0 1 (2) Sm Te Cm 0 4 (8) Sm Te Km 1 (2) 1 (2) Sm Te Am 8 (16) 7 (14) Sm Cm Am 1 (2) 0 Sm Te Cm Km 2 (4) 1 (2) Sm Te Cm Am 0 3 (6) Sm Te Km Am 3 (6) 6 (12) Sm Te Cm Km Am 3 (6) 2 (4) a Sm, streptomycin; Km, kanamycin; Te, tetracycline; Cm, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin; Cr, cephalothin. b Total of 50. None of these isolates displayed resistance to colisten or gentamicin. 374 MECKES APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL. UV DISINFECTION AND R-FACTOR COLIFORMS 375 TABLE 5. Antibiotic resistance patterns encountered in total coliforms isolated on media containing tetracycline No. of isolates' (%) from samples Resistance patterna Before UV After UV irradiation irradiation Te 17 (34) 10 (20) Sm Te 13 (26) 8 (16) Te Am 3 (6) 2 (4) Sm Te Cm 0 4 (8) Sm Te Km 1 (2) 1 (2) Sm Te Am 9 (18) 12 (24) Sm Te Cm Am 2 (4) 2 (4) Sm Te Km Am 5 (10) 7 (14) Sm Te Cr Am 0 1 (2) Sm Te Cm Km Am 0 3 (6) a Sm, streptomycin; Km, kanamycin; Te, tetracycline; Cm, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin; Cr, cephalothin. bTotal of 50. None of these isolates displayed resistance to colisten or gentamicin. patterns made up a total of 40% of all isolates. After UV treatment, 70% of all isolates from media containing chloramphenicol exhibited one or the other of these resistance patterns. These resistance patterns were observed less frequently in strains isolated on media containing streptomycin or tetracycline. However, the Sm Te Cm Am and the Sm Te Cm Km Am resistance patterns occurred more frequently (10 occurrences) in strains taken from UV-treated effluents and isolated on media containing streptomycin or tetracycline (Tables 4 and 5) than in strains taken from effluents before UV treatment and isolated in the same manner (5 occurrences). Transfer of antibiotic resistance. The 300 strains were tested for their ability to transfer resistance to an antibiotic-sensitive strain of E. coli K-12. The method used required that resistance to the selection antibiotic, upon which the donor strain was isolated, be transferred to the recipient strain. Therefore, it is possible that transfer of resistance to antibiotics other than the antibiotic used for selection may have occurred without being detected. All recombinant strains were examined for multiple antibiotic resistance patterns as described above. The percentage of coliforms transferring resistance to the antibiotic-sensitive strain varied (Table 7). This variation was dependent upon the selection antibiotic used and UV irradiation treatment. Overall, 138 of the 300 isolates (46%) transferred antibiotic resistance to the antibiotic- sensitive strain. Over 86% of the recombinants exhibited resistance to all of the antibiotics to which the donor strains were resistant. This high efficiency was probably the result of allowing mixed culture growth of donor and recipient strains to proceed for 16 h. It is interesting to note that although there was no significant increase observed in the percentage of streptomycin-resistant total coliforms surviving UV irradiation, the ability of this population to transfer antibiotic resistance increased. This increase in ability to transfer drug resistance was not observed for coliforms isolated from media containing tetracycline or chloramphenicol. Coliforms isolated on media containing chloramphenicol showed somewhat less ability to transfer resistance after UV irradiation. However, this reduction in ability to transfer is probably not significant. Transfer of resistance to six antibiotics was noted in two of the total coliform strains taken from effluents before UV treatment and isolated on media containing chloramphenicol. DISCUSSION Ampicillin, streptomycin, and tetracycline are probably the most commonly used antibiotics in human medicine. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that a higher frequency of occurrence of bacteria resistant to these antibiotics would be expected in wastewater effluents. It is important TABLE 6. Antibiotic resistance patterns encountered in total coliforms isolated on media containing chloramphenicol No. of isolatesb (%) from Resistance patteMa samples Before UV After UV irradiation irradiation Cm 2 (4) 1 (2) Sm Cm 1 (2) 0 Te Cm 1 (2) 1 (2) Cm Am 0 5 (10) SmTe Cm 4 (8) 0 SmCm Am 3 (6) 0 Te Cm Km 0 1 (2) Te Cm Cr 3 (6) 0 Te Cm Am 2 (4) 1 (2) Sm Te Cm Km 5 (10) 1 (2) Sm Te Cm Cr 1 (2) 0 Sm Te Cm Am 11 (22) 18 (36) Sm Cm Km Am 0 1 (2) Te Cm Km Am 1 (2) 0 Te Cm Cr Am 1 (2) 0 Sm Te Cm Km Am 9 (18) 17 (34) SmTe Cm CrAm 3 (6) 2 (4) Sm Te Cm Gm Km Am 1 (2) 0 Sm Te Cm Km Cr Am 2 (4) 2 (4) a Sm, streptomycin; Km, kanamycin; Te, tetracycline; Gm, gentamicin; Cm, chloramphenicol; Am, ampicillin; Cr, cephalothin. b Total of 50. None of these isolates displayed resistance to colisten. VOL. 43, 1982 APPL. ENVIRON. MICROBIOL. TABLE 7. Total coliform isolates transferring antibiotic resistance No. of isolates (%)a Selection antibiotic Before UV After UV irradiation irradiation Streptomycin 19 (38) 32 (64) Tetracycline 19 (38) 19 (38) Chloramphenicol 26 (52) 23 (46) Total 64 (43) 74 (49) a Overall total, 138 (46). to remember that isolates in these experiments were tested for resistance to only eight antibiotics, and, consequently, resistance to other antibiotics may be carried by these organisms. The mean percentage of all total coliform isolates capable of transferring all or part of their antibiotic resistance (46%) was identical to that observed by Fontaine and Hoadley (10) for drugresistant fecal coliforms isolated from undisinfected municipal wastewaters. Similarly, Sturtevant and Feary (29) reported that 43% of the drug-resistant total coliforms, isolated from undisinfected municipal wastewaters (before and after biological trickling-filter treatment), were capable of transferring resistance to a sensitive strain of E. coli. These same researchers observed the same lack of resistance to colisten and gentamicin in total coliform isolates that was observed in this study. The increase in the percentage of total coliforms resistant to tetracycline or chloramphenicol after exposures to UV light may be explained by the presence of an additional R-factor which mediates UV resistance. An R-factor mediating UV resistance has been characterized in E. coli K-12 by Marsh and Smith (22) and noted in S. typhimuriun by Drabble and Stocker (7). Association of a UV R-factor with resistance to specific antibiotics could also explain the increased occurrence of the Sm Te Cm Am and Sm Te Cm Km Am resistance patterns observed in isolates from UV-treated effluents. However, no association between R-factors which mediate UV resistance and R-factors which mediate resistance to specific antibiotics has been found. Alternatively, the increase in the percentage of total coliforms resistant to tetracycline or chloramphenicol after UV irradiation may be explained by the mechanism of R-factor-mediated resistance to tetracycline. R-factor-mediated resistance to aminoglycoside antibiotics such as streptomycin, kanamycin, and gentamicin has been found to be associated with specific enzymes which modify or hydrolyze the antibiotic to a more innocuous form (8). Similarly, production of chloramphenicol acetyltransferase, which enzymatically inactivates chloramphenicol, is coded for by R-factors (6, 8). However, R-factor-mediated resistance to tetracycline is not associated with enzymatic modification of tetracycline. The resistance is due to accumulation within the cell envelope of specific proteins which inhibit transport of tetracycline to target ribosomes of the cell (5). The specific protein responsible for bacterial resistance to tetracycline (tet protein) may absorb sufficient UV light at 254 nm to afford these bacteria some degree of protection from UV irradiation. This could explain why an increase in the percentage of surviving tetracycline-resistant total coliforms was noted after UV treatment. The accompanying increase in surviving chloramphenicol-resistant total coliforms was not due to chloramphenicol resistance, but to concomitant resistance to tetracycline. This becomes apparent when the percentage of strains isolated on media containing chloramphenicol and resistant to tetracycline, both before and after UV treatment, is compared. No significant difference in the percentage of these strains exhibiting both chloramphenicol and tetracycline resistance was noted (88% before UV versus 86% after UV). Since a high percentage of chloramphenicol-resistant coliforms in effluents sampled before UV treatment was concomitantly resistant to tetracycline, the percent increase in surviving chloramphenicol-resistant coliforms after UV treatment cannot be attributed to chloramphenicol resistance alone because there was no decrease in the number of isolates concomitantly resistant to tetracycline. Further work is necessary to confirm this notion. It is evident from this work as well as from the work of others (10, 13-15, 29) that antibioticresistant coliforms are entering the aquatic environment via treated municipal wastewater effluents. This work demonstrates that UV light disinfection can effectively reduce the number of total coliforms both sensitive and resistant to antibiotics in an activated sludge effluent. This work also points out that there is a significant increase in the percentage of the surviving total coliform population resistant to tetracycline and chloramphenicol after UV irradiation. This study concerned itself with UV disinfection. There is little information available which discusses the effect of other disinfectants on antibiotic-resistant organisms. Additional investigations should be conducted to determine what effect other wastewater disinfectants, such as chlorine or ozone, may have on the antibioticresistant fraction of the bacterial population. There is an additional need to determine the sanitary significance of the results of such investigations. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank John Trela of the Biological Science Department, 376 MECKES UV DISINFECTION AND R-FACTOR COLIFORMS 377 University of Cincinnati, for providing the recipient E. coli strain used in this study and invaluable guidance. I also thank P. V. Scarpino of the University of Cincinnati Civil and Environmental Engineering Department for valuable discussions and helpful criticism. LITERATURE CITED 1. Anonymous. 1973. Current trends. Follow-up on chloramphenicol- resistant Salmonella typhi-Mexico. Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep. 22:159. 2. Bauer, A. W., W. M. Kirby, J. C. Sherris, and M. Turck. 1966. Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standardized single disk method. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 45:493-4%. 3. Brungs, W. A. 1973. Effects of residual chlorine on aquatic life. J. Water Pollut. Ctl. Fed. 45:2180-2193. 4. Chatterjee, A. K., and M. P. Starr. 1972. Transfer among Erwinia spp. and other enterobacteria of antibiotic resistance carried on R-factors. J. Bacteriol. 112:576-584. 5. Chopra, I., and T. G. B. Howe. 1978. Bacterial resistance to tetracyclines. Microbiol. Rev. 42:707-724. 6. Davies, J., and D. I. Smith. 1978. Plasmid-determined resistance to antimicrobial agents. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 32:496-518. 7. Drabble, W. T., and B. A. D. Stocker. 1968. R. (transmissable drug resistance) factors in Salmonella typhimuriun: pattern of transduction by phage P22 and ultraviolet protection effect. J. Gen. Microbiol. 53:109-123. 8. Falkow, S. 1975. Infectious multiple drug resistance. Pion Limited, London. 9. Feary, T. W., A. B. Sturtevant, Jr., and J. Lankford. 1972. Antibiotic-resistant coliforms in fresh and salt water. Arch. Environ. Health 25:215-220. 10. Fontaine, T. D., and A. W. Hoadley. 1976. Transferable drug resistance associated with coliforms isolated from hospital and domestic sewage. Health Lab. Sci. 13:238- 245. 11. Gangarosa, E. J., J. V. Bennett, C. Wyatt, P. E. Pierce, J. Olarte, P. M. Hernandes, V. Vazquez, and M. D. Bessudo. 1972. An epidemic-associated episome? J. Infect. Dis. 126:215-218. 12. Geldreich, E. E. 1972. Water-borne pathogens, p. 207- 241. In R. Mitchell (ed.), Water pollution microbiology. Wiley-Interscience, New York. 13. Goyal, S. M., C. P. Gerba, and J. L. Melnick. 1979. Transferable drug resistance in bacteria of coastal canal water and sediment. Water Res. 13:349-356. 14. Grabow, W. 0. K., 0. W. Prozesky, and J. S. Burger. 1975. Behavior in a river and dam of coliform bacteria with transferable or non-transferable drug resistance. Water Res. 9:777-782. 15. Grabow, W. 0. K., 0. W. Prozesky, and L. S. Smith. Drug resistance of coliform bacteria in hospital and city sewage. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 3:175-180. 16. Grabow, W. 0. K., 0. W. Prozesky, and L. S. Smith. 1974. Drug-resistant coliforms call for a review of water quality standards. Water Res. 8:1-9. 17. Grabow, W. 0. K., M. VanZyl, and 0. W. Prozesky. 1976. Behavior in conventional sewage purification processes of coliform bacteria with transferable or non-transferable drug resistance. Water Res. 10:717-723. 18. Johnson, J. D., K. Aldrich, D. E. Francisco, T. Wolff, and M. Elliott. 1979. UV disinfection of secondary effluent, p. 108-116. In A. D. Venosa (ed.), Progress in wastewater disinfection technology. Proceedings of the National Symposium, EPA-600/9-79-018. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 19. Kelch, W. J., and J. S. Lee. 1978. Antibiotic resistance patterns of gram-negative bacteria isolated from environmental sources. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 36:450-456. 20. Linton, K. B., M. H. Richmond, R. Bevau, and W. A. Gillespie. 1974. Antibiotic resistance and R-factors in coliform bacilli isolated from hospital and domestic sewage. J. Med. Microbiol. 7:91-103. 21. Lowbury, E. J. L., J. R. Balb, and E. Roe. 1972. Clearance from a hospital of gram-negative bacilli that transfer carbenicillin resistance to Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Lancet 11:941-945. 22. Marsh, E. B., Jr., and D. H. Smith. 1969. R-factors improving survival of Escherichia coli K-12 after ultraviolet irradiation. J. Bacteriol. 100:128-139. 23. Oliver, B. G., and E. G. Cosgrove. 1975. The disinfection of sewage treatment plant effluents using ultraviolet light. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 53:170-174. 24. Paniker, C. K., and K. N. Vimala. 1972. Transferable chloramphenicol resistance on Salmonella typhi. Nature (London) 239:109-110. 25. Polback, M., P. Charache, R. E. Nleman, M. P. Jett, J. A. Reinhardt, and P. H. Hardy, Jr. 1972. Factors influencing colonization and antibiotic resistance patterns of gramnegative bacteria in hospital patients. Lancet i1:668-671. 26. Scheible, O., G. Binkowski, and T. Mulligan. 1979. Fullscale evaluation of ultraviolet disinfection of a secondary effluent. In A. D. Venosa (ed.), Progress in wastewater disinfection technology. Proceedings of the National Symposium EPA-600/9-79-018. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 27. Smith, H. W. 1970. Incidence in river water of Escherichia coli containing R-factors. Nature (London) 228:1286- 1288. 28. Smith, H. W. 1971. Incidence of R' Escherichia coli in coastal bathing waters of Britain. Nature (London) 234:155-156. 29. Sturtevant, A. B., Jr. and T. W. Feary. 1969. Incidence of infectious drug resistance among lactose-fermenting bacteria isolated from raw and treated sewage. Appl. Microbiol. 18:918-924. 30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory. 1978. Microbiological methods for monitoring the environment, EPA-600/8-78-017. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 31. Watanabe, T. 1962. Infective heredity of multiple drug resistance in bacteria. Bacteriol. Rev. 27:87-115. 32. Watanabe, T. 1971. Infectious drug resistance in bacteria. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 56:43-98. 33. White, G. C. 1972. Handbook of chlorination. Van Nostrand- Reinhold, New York. 34. Yokata, T., T. Kasuga, M. Kaneko, and S. Kuwahara. 1972. Genetic behavior of R-factors in Vibrio cholerae. J. Bacteriol. 109:440 442. VOL. 43, 1982 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 11 12:26:07 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 12:26:07 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Homeowner files civil suit over septic waste dumping into pond Message-ID: Sludgewatch ADmin: The Province of Ontario still provides permits to septic waste haulers to spread untreated septic waste - toilet holding tanks, portable toilet waste, slaughterhouse waste - on agricultural lands. Ontario has not implemented the Walkerton Inquiry recommendation. ................................. August 10, 2009 Homeowner files suit over illegal dumping Elizabeth Ganga eganga at lohud.com NEW CASTLE - Stephen Bauer lives less than two miles from the commercial center of Mount Kisco. But to get to his house, you plunge off the main road down a one-lane gravel drive into a shaded glen dotted with boulders and stone walls. A small creek runs east in a stone bed under a small culvert to a pond that supports heron, perch, bass and snapping turtles. The water eventually joins with other streams and runs into New York City's New Croton Reservoir. The secluded area has only two other houses nearby. The natural surroundings are a fundamental part of the life Bauer and his family have led there for most of the past 10 years, with his children running in and out of the house and the family wading, fishing and canoeing in the pond. "It's a little gem of a thing," Bauer said. But that protected playground was violated in September 2006, when a septic-truck driver dumped a load of pumped-out tank waste into the creek flowing into Bauer's pond. Bauer's neighbors on Woodland Road were driving from their house to the main road shortly before noon when, they said, they came upon a green Chappaqua Septic truck blocking the road at the culvert with its hose trailing into the stream. "When the man saw us coming, he ran to the truck and pulled the hose out quickly," said Miriam Danko, Bauer's up-the-road neighbor, who has lived there since 1955. Then he moved the truck into a side driveway to let them pass. Danko and her husband drove on, but quickly decided to go back to try to get a license-plate number. When they returned, the truck was gone, but the septic smell hit them through the windows of their car. "The whole bank is covered by this gray sludge," Bauer said, recalling the scene. "There's condoms and sanitary napkins." The Dankos called Bauer to tell him of the damage to his property, launching him on a multiyear effort to have someone held officially responsible for the apparent environmental crime his neighbors witnessed. "All I wanted was the bad guys to get caught and the truth to be known and my pond to get cleaned up," Bauer said. But despite the eyewitness accounts, video of the damage and a lengthy investigation by New York City's Department of Environmental Protection police, the Westchester County District Attorney's Office and others, no charges have been brought and no other action has been taken. Finally, in June, after giving up hope of official action, Bauer filed a civil lawsuit against Chappaqua Septic and its owner, Brian Murphy. Bauer, who owns a coffee import company, is still at a loss to understand why the assistant district attorney in the environmental crimes unit, Sue Brailey, assured him for months that the criminal case was moving forward but in the end did not bring charges. "I thought we got these guys red-handed," he said. Lucian Chalfen, a spokesman for the district attorney, said his office and the DEP police had thoroughly investigated Bauer's report but didn't find a legal basis for charges. "We were unable to link the material dumped in the pond to any particular vehicle and particularly a Chappaqua Septic vehicle," he said. The state Attorney General's Office is also looking at the matter, but it's not clear that it will take action. The head of the Westchester County police Environmental Security Unit, Ron Gatto, conducted his own investigation after the district attorney declined to prosecute anyone. But he said the delay had made it more difficult. Still, Gatto is keeping the case open in case the state attorney general decides to sue. "I think civilly we built a great case for the AG's Office," he said. Murphy, the owner of Chappaqua Septic, who is also a commissioner of the Chappaqua Fire District and president of the department, referred questions to his lawyer, Kevin Kitson. Kitson did not return calls. The day after the incident, Murphy told DEP police that none of his trucks had been in the area, according to a DEP police report. Though Gatto said he was not aware of other complaints about Chappaqua Septic, the police do get a lot of complaints about dumped septic sludge. In the past few years, more controls have been put in place to try to regulate septic haulers. The Westchester County Department of Health began licensing "septage collectors" in January 2008 and requiring data on every septic tank evacuation, a spokeswoman said. The state Department of Environmental Conservation also licenses haulers and has ultimate regulatory authority. In 2007, New Castle beefed up its own water-pollution regulations. Town Administrator Gerry Faiella, who became aware of Bauer's complaint in July, said he needed to make sure town enforcement agencies coordinated with New Castle police and county and state agencies in such instances. As much as that could help in the future, it doesn't help Bauer, whose joy in his pristine surroundings has been tainted and his faith in the system tested. "How rare it is to catch someone in the act?" he said. "And even with that, the system failed." http://www.lohud.com/article/2009908100313 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 12 07:24:59 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:24:59 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Ontario -Rethink decision to locate dump on site of aquifer Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Ontario has approved a landfill over an aquifer of the purest water in the world. Again, it would appear that the province is putting at risk rural water supplies in order to facilitate dumping of urban waste. Just...like...sludge... The Walkerton Inquiry looked at Source Water Protection - and we meant all the water in Ontario that someone might drink. The Province flipped that off..and decided that 'Source Water' means only treated municipal drinking supplies. Tireless work by Tiny Township water champions - a curious alliance of aboriginal communities, farmers, and wealthy cottagers - has brought focus on this terrible decision. Write to the Minister of Environment and ask for a moratorium on Site 41 and on sludge spreading: The Honorable John Gerretson jgerretsen.mpp at liberal.ola.org ............................................ Rethink decision to locate dump on site of aquifer Jul 26, 2009 David Crombie Maude Barlow Cool weather has not chilled hot passions in a showdown in the rolling hills of Simcoe county's Tiny Township. There, First Nations women, farmers, local residents, seniors and students have come together to protest Site 41 ? a planned dumpsite that will sit atop the Alliston aquifer, an underground water reservoir that extends from Georgian Bay to Lake Simcoe and the Oak Ridges Moraine. Site 41 has been hotly contested for more than 15 years, but the Ministry of the Environment finally signed off on the permit and a badly divided county council allowed excavation to begin in early summer. Recently, a growing chorus of voices has called for a one-year moratorium in order to hold the public hearings that never took place and to allow for an independent scientific assessment of the model used to grant the permit, which has never been made public. Proponents of Site 41 question the reason for a moratorium and claim they know enough about the project to move ahead. However, there are several new developments that would justify a moratorium. First, the permit was granted on the belief that the water in the aquitard (below the surface but above the aquifer) flows upward, and that garbage will pose no threat to the aquifer. It was in fact a condition for granting the permit that the site have uninterrupted "upward gradients." However, several recent observations tell a different story. A monitoring well on the site shows signs that there is a connection between the upper groundwater and the aquifer, which would be a violation of the permit conditions. In fact, an independent hydrogeologist, the late David Charlesworth, warned county council that water in the aquitard was in some places flowing downward, which could put the aquifer at risk. The method used to grant the Site 41 permit was "fundamentally flawed," he declared. Second, since the Alliston aquifer was chosen for a dumpsite many years ago, much has been learned in Canada and around the world about the need to protect watersheds and water basins. In 2006, recognizing the crucial need to protect Ontario's water resources, the government passed the Clean Water Act, which states that stopping contaminants from getting into our drinking water supplies is the first line of defence in protecting our environment and our health. Ontario Environment Commissioner Gordon Miller has stated that if the decision were to be taken today, the Alliston aquifer would never have been chosen for a dumpsite. Finally, opposition to Site 41 has grown dramatically. In a recent online poll, 85 per cent of local residents supported the blockade to stop construction. Politicians from all political parties, provincial and federal environmental groups and respected leaders such as David Suzuki have come together to protect the aquifer, the source of drinking water so clean that it is referred to as "reference water" ? the gold standard of water quality ? by a university laboratory in Germany. Does Simcoe County Council want to be known as the community that put a dumpsite on the purist water in the world? Or can we all step back now and call a one-year halt while we decide how best to be stewards of this water for the future? Former Toronto mayor David Crombie is a resident of Tiny Township. Maude Barlow is senior adviser on water to the president of the UN and national chairperson of the Council of Canadians. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 12 07:29:07 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:29:07 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Akron Ohio plans put food waste together with sludge in digesters Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: It makes sense to turn food waste into good clean compost. But the scale of cities means that there is a great deal of food waste to manage and the smell of putrid food decomposing makes food waste compost sites hard to site. In several places food wastes are being comingled with sewage sludge - which means that all the industrial contaminants foul the resulting compost. Remember that sludge is like trash - sludge is about 20 percent of the waste produced in a city. ................................................... http://www.ohio.com/news/52859512.html Akron has plan to add leftovers to sludge Ohio EPA permit allows city to put food wastes in sewage to make biogas By Bob Downing Beacon Journal staff writer Published on Monday, Aug 10, 2009 Akron's green-energy system might be getting an additional fuel: food waste. The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency has approved a permit for the city to add organic wastes to the sewage sludge that generates an environmentally friendly biogas. That gas powers turbines to produce electricity at the city-owned composting plant off Riverview Road. In January, Akron filed the paperwork for a pilot project involving its ''anaerobic digester,'' the key equipment associated with the green system. The 54-page state permit allows cola syrup, spent salad dressings, spent soda and beer, meat wastes from dog-food processing, corn chip mash, bakery wastes and pasta noodle wastes to be added to the sludge. The city and its partner, KB Compost Services, expect to begin testing in the next few months, said Brian Gresser, Akron's water pollution control administrator. The city's storm-water management plan for the plant must be modified before the testing can begin. That will take up to three months, he said. The experiment will enable the city and KB Compost to determine how food waste would mix with the sludge, what wastes work best and perhaps which ones should be avoided, Gresser said. The testing probably will take at least several months, he said. KB Compost has contacted a few local food producers about getting loads of waste when the testing begins, he said. Akron and the company also would need to determine the market for the soil additives created in the process, he said. Akron would like to see how the food wastes work out before deciding whether to expand the biogas system to handle all of the city's sewage sludge, Gresser said. The current system handles about one-third of the city's sludge. Expanding the system to handle the remaining two-thirds would cost about $25 million, he said. Akron is seeking federal stimulus funds and other grants to fund the expansion, he said. If the tests on food waste are successful, Akron could enlarge the system slightly and charge food processors for taking their wastes ? and perhaps sludge from other communities, he said. That would enable Akron to reduce costs to its sewer customers, he said. Enlarging the system would also permit Akron to shut down the aging composting facility, which generates odor complaints. Akron's $7 million biogas system has been operating since late 2007 and has been working well, officials said. The new facility is owned by the city and operated by KB Compost, the company that also manages the composting plant. KB Compost Services joined with German-based Schmack Biogas AG to form a new company, Schmack BioEnergy LLC in Independence, to promote the German technology in the United States. It is a process that is being pursued by other cities, including Canton and Columbus. The system relies on decomposition by bacteria that do not need oxygen, a process known as anaerobic digestion. The bacteria make the high-solids sludge ferment. The bacteria multiply, consume part of the sludge and produce a burnable gas. The biogas is 60 percent methane, 35 percent carbon dioxide and 5 percent other gases. In comparison, natural gas is 99 percent methane. The system includes two tanks: one capable of processing 160,000 gallons of sludge and a second that can hold 450,000 gallons. The sludge will be processed for 25 to 30 days at temperatures of 90 to 100 degrees. The plant now handles up to 5,000 tons of sludge a year from the city's sewage treatment plant across the Cuyahoga River off Akron-Peninsula Road. The current system produces 335 kilowatts, or enough electricity to power 325 homes. About 9 percent of the electricity produced is used to operate the biogas facility, with the rest being used to power the composting plant. That produces a monthly savings of $14,000 over what Akron had been paying. The savings represent about 10 percent of the total electric bill for the composting plant and sewage plant, he said. That bill in 2008 was more than $1.5 million. Bob Downing can be reached at 330-996-3745 or bdowning at thebeaconjournal.com. comments OldManGrump Tallmadge, OH Posted 06:17 AM, 08/10/2009 Typical Mayor Donny Boy Akron project, spend $7 million to save $14,000 a month. Had he just invested the $7 million in 4% tax free bonds, he would have yielded about $23,000 a month in income to the city. Now the city wants to invest another $25 million to save $28,000 a month more. Makes NO sense to me. Then again, does anything Mayor Donny Boy does make sense? Wait till the explosions start like they did for his garbage burning boiler heating system. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 12 07:34:34 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:34:34 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sudbury Ontario- thinks people want to buy sludge compost Message-ID: http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1696465 Biosolids plant a go, without city help CITY HALL: William Day Construction shares its 'vision' Posted By DENIS ST. PIERRE, THE SUDBURY STAR August 12, 2009 A Sudbury company planning to build a biosolids treatment plant does not have an inside track in securing a city contract to process municipal sewage sludge, officials say. "They're definitely -- definitely -- separate (issues)," Ward 1 Coun. Joe Cimino said, referring to the city's need for a sewage sludge processing facility and a proposal by William Day Construction to build its own processing plant. Cimino made the comment Tuesday as city council's planning committee approved a property rezoning to allow Day Construction to pursue its plan for a privately run biosolids plant. Day Construction is proceeding with its development plan regardless of the city's need for a sewage sludge processing facility, added Shawn Day, the company's general manager. "This is something we're going to be doing of our own accord," Day told the planning committee. However, Day indicated his company has broader, longer-term plans, including interest in the city's need for a sludge processing facility. "We do have future visions," he told the planning committee, without elaborating. Sources at city hall previously confirmed Day Construction expressed interest in building and operating a sludge-processing plant that could serve the municipality's needs. Following Tuesday's meeting, Day said if the city issued a tender for a sludge-processing plant, his company would consider bidding on such a contract. "We're waiting to see the tender from the consulting group," he said, referring to a consultant hired by the city to explore options for developing a sludge-processing facility. Currently, the city does not have a processing facility for sewage sludge --the solid material left over from standard sewage treatment plants. For decades, the city has dumped the sludge from its sewage treatment facilities into tailings ponds owned by Vale Inco. But Vale Inco has advised the city it wants the dumping to cease by the end of 2010. City officials have estimated it would cost between $30 million and $38 million to develop a sludge-processing facility. City council decided to hire a consultant to recommend the best options for designing, building, operating and financing such a plant. A decision from council on the preferred option to develop and operate the plant is months away and no one, including Day Construction, has any advantage in the decision-making process, Cimino said. "They're not ahead of the queue; they'll have to line up with everyone else" when council seeks input on the project, he said. Council has appointed a committee, consisting of Cimino, Ward 2 Coun. Jacques Barbeau and city staff members, to work with the consultant and report to council this fall on the sludge-processing file. Cimino is among a small number of council members, including Ward 3 Coun. Claude Berthiaume and Mayor John Rodriguez, who have indicated their preference is for such infrastructure facilities to remain under the traditional ownership and operation of the municipality. The city's main employees' union also is urging council to retain public financing and operation of the sludge plant, warning that a so-called public-private partnership would result in higher costs and poorer services for taxpayers. Meanwhile, Day Construction says its plan to develop a biosolids treatment facility is based on a private-sector market opportunity. The plant proposed by the company is a so-called bioreactor that can process sewage sludge and organic matter, such as food waste, sawdust and tree bark, grass clippings, even cardboard, Shawn Day said. The company plans to cater to businesses, such as grocery stores, that currently have their organic waste dumped at city landfill sites, he said. "We've seen an opportunity, more and more so in the last little while," he said. "We think we can produce compost and sell it back to the market." From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 9 21:42:50 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2009 21:42:50 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Hunting for engineered nanomaterials in the environment Message-ID: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/es902174z?cookieSet=1 Hunting for engineered nanomaterials in the environment Naomi Lubick Environ. Sci. Technol. Publication Date (Web): July 28, 2009 Copyright ? 2009 American Chemical Society Most environmental research related to nanomaterials has focused on their toxicity in idealized lab settings. But researchers are slowly shifting their lab methods to look for real nanomaterials in the environment, which is key for determining which nanomaterials to study, as well as where and how they might cause harm. Last year, researchers from the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (Empa) demonstrated some early success: they traced titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles shed from the paint on building exteriors into soils nearby and possibly streams (Environ. Pollut. 2008, DOI 10.1016/j.envpol.2008.08.004). The team used electron microscopy to detect the nanoparticles and bulk chemical analysis to confirm their presence. But finding the nanoparticles in the environment is just one part of the problem. ?The task that we have actually is to separate the particles from the surrounding background,? says Frank von der Kammer of the University of Vienna. That?s because some nanoparticles occur naturally or are shed from products that take advantage of a material?s normal size?or ?bulk? form. For example, a large amount of bulk TiO2 has been used for decades as a paint pigment and for other applications. This bulk form can release tagalong nanoparticles. The presence of either type of TiO2 in the environment could throw off measurements of the engineered nanoparticles. Researchers have suggested that crystal sizes and a particle?s accompanying organic matrix could distinguish manufactured forms from natural ones. In some cases, a particle might look like TiO2 stuck to organic matter when it is really an organic-coated Ti particle, further complicating detection. So far, nobody has identified a technique ?that gives you all the important information you need,? says von der Kammer, who is working with other researchers to compare methods to best distinguish nanomaterials. In fact, a single, comprehensive technique may never exist, considering the number of nanomaterials out there with potentially different properties, he adds. But each method can give information about some parameters, and putting those elements together can be like ?overlaying ten blurred pictures to get one sharp image in the end.? One approach, presented by researchers from the University of Gothenburg (Sweden) at the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry?s European meeting in June 2009, is field-flow fractionation coupled with inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS). The particles settle out according to size as the sample passes through the flow, and then ICPMS can be used to determine the composition of individual particles. Researchers have yet to find 100% of the test materials that they put into their measuring devices, von der Kammer adds. Nanoparticles tend to stick to vessel walls, are difficult to nebulize, or require extreme pretreatment for certain devices. Furthermore, most engineered nanoparticles that will make their way into the environment are not likely to be the naked ones that researchers have studied in the lab. For example, the TiO2 nanoparticles used in a commercially available sunscreen have an aluminum oxide coating and a hydrophobic outer layer, and they lose their outer hydrophobic coating quickly, as reported by Cline Botta of the Centre Europen de Recherche et d?Enseignement des Gosciences de l?Environnement (France) and her colleagues. However, as Botta described at the American Chemical Society meeting in March 2009 and the Goldschmidt Conference in June, the intermediate aluminum coating tends to remain intact. That residual layer could affect how the TiO2 nanoparticles aggregate and travel through water, as well as their possible toxicity to animals such as daphniids?something Botta and colleagues are testing now. Bernd Nowack of Empa notes that there are already 200 different forms of TiO2. After nano-TiO2?or any nanomaterial for that matter?is functionalized with coatings, it may have thousands of possible forms. ?Do we have to study every single one of them?? he asks. Instead, Nowack suggests that inventorying how these nanomaterials are used?i.e., full life-cycle assessments?will allow researchers to refine their search in the real world. The amount of engineered nano-TiO2 on the market will only increase in the next few years, potentially replacing the majority of the bulk form in use by 2025 (Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, DOI 10.1021/es8032549), according to Christine Ogilvie Robichaud of Duke University and her colleagues. (Current global production levels of bulk TiO2 are about 4 million metric tons per year, with 1.3 million metric tons per year produced in the U.S. alone. Nano-TiO2 production is probably far less than that?and much less than most high-production-volume materials.) Coauthor Mark Wiesner says his team hopes to ?keep knocking more off the list? of nanomaterials. Inventories lead to estimates of exposure, he says, which are key to investigating toxicity. In a new ES&T article (DOI 10.1021/es803621k), Wiesner and his partners in the Center for Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology at Duke University assess the issues further. This month, several meetings may further focus such research. Scientists will gather in Vienna to share advances related to nanomaterials in general, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plans to host an invitation-only meeting about TiO2 nanoparticles in the environment. TiO2?s photochemical reactions in conjunction with its possible widespread occurrence in the environment make it of particular interest, says Paul Westerhoff of Arizona State University. Westerhoff is a coauthor of new research in ES&T (DOI 10.1021/es901102n) showing that nano-TiO2 from food and cosmetics, for example, can enter the waste treatment system and travel readily through waste treatment plants into the environment. ?Most of [the TiO2] ends up in biosolids,? says Westerhoff, and ?wherever biosolids go, so goes TiO2??from agricultural fields, for example, into streams and rivers. From a life-cycle perspective, he says, nano-TiO2 is the only nanomaterial ?that looks like there will be much of it out there.? TiO2 that comes from toothpaste (top) could wind up suspended in effluent (bottom) from a wastewater treatment plant and then could easily be dispersed in the environment by piggybacking on biosolids. PAUL WESTERHOFF ET AL., DOI 10.1021/ES901102N From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 14 14:05:21 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:05:21 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sludge & The White House - The White House lowers lead levels in White House garden Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: The White House has taken action: lowered lead in White House garden to 14 ppm lead from 93 ppm lead, and has raised the pH. With some heavy metals - like cadmium - there are risks from eating the green veggies grown in high cadmium soils. With lead - the issue is ingesting the soil - as dust tracked into the home on shoes, licking soiled hands, eating veggies out of garden without washing them ... etc. And don't forget that people, especially children, in Washington DC have already been exposed to lead in the drinking water supply. When Washington DC went to 'choramination' to replace simple chorination of tap water, the treated tap water scoured lead and copper from old pipes into the drinking water supply. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012602402.html The White House has responded wonderfully to the lead-in-the-garden story. Hey...where is the sludge industry? No press releases on how spanking proud they are of spreading sludge on the White House? Funny - the retired gardener named below can only remember one sludge spread at the White House. On the web you find references to the White House lawn being spread with sludge in the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, and after 2001. Al Rubin - retired EPA biosolids coordinator - he figures it has been spread 5 times. .......................... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/garden/13lead.html In Obama Garden, Less Lead Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times GOOD EARTH The White House gardening team has reduced the lead levels in the kitchen garden on the South Lawn by fortifying the soil. Sam Kass, far left, White House food initiative coordinator, checked the crops this week. August 12, 2009 WHEN the Obamas decided to turn some of the South Lawn at the White House into a kitchen garden, they did what many smart urban gardeners do: they had the soil tested for its nutrients and potential contaminants, like lead. The results prompted a number of headlines suggesting that the level of lead in the garden, 93 parts per million, was dangerous. Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times Bill Yosses, left, executive pastry chef, and Mr. Kass surveyed the bounty, including tomatoes. It wasn?t. The level is well below the 400 p.p.m. considered hazardous by the Environmental Protection Agency, though not below the more stringent goals recommended by some countries like the Netherlands, at 40 p.p.m. Work done to improve the fertility of the soil before planting helped reduce the lead level, and test results just released by the White House indicate that the levels are now so low (14 parts per million) that they are similar to those found in places where there are no automobiles. According to Ellen Silbergeld, professor of environmental health sciences at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, ?if you do measurements around the U.S. where there has been no human activity and where there has been no impact from automobiles or other sources of lead these are kinds of levels you will see.? Even the 93 p.p.m., she said, ?is not associated with increased risk of harm.? ?When you are thinking of things to worry about,? she said, ?I would not be thinking about those levels of lead.? While acknowledging that 93 p.p.m. was not a hazard, Mother Jones magazine?s Web site attributed the long-term use of sludge as a fertilizer on the White House lawn for the presence, not just of lead, but of many other undesirable substances like antibiotics and sleeping pills. Sludge comprises the solids in sewage that separate out during treatment. According to the magazine, sludge was used for at least a decade on the White House lawn, possibly until the late 1990s. But Irvin Williams, who retired as head groundskeeper at the White House last year, after 59 years on the job, said sludge was used only once there, in 1985. And in 1994 President Bill Clinton sent a directive to government agencies telling them to start using environmentally friendly practices for landscaping government grounds, like reducing the use of toxic chemicals. Sam Kass, White House food initiative coordinator and an assistant chef, who now combines his duties of cooking for the first family with garden expertise, explained what the White House had done before planting to make sure the soil was safe for vegetables. First it was tested and then amendments were added accordingly: lime, green sand and crab meal as well as organic matter in the form of compost made by the National Park Service. The pH was adjusted to between 6.5 and 7. When the pH is in that range, lead is unavailable to the plants. Gardening experts say that good sources of organic matter also include composted leaves, nonacid peat, and well-rotted manure. If soils have high levels of lead, one-third by volume of organic matter should be added to reduce lead availability Because of the potential for lead contamination, leaf mulch obtained along highways or city streets should not be used. Gardens should be situated as far away as possible from busy streets and older buildings. Soil testing is available from the nearest Cooperative Extension office. The Environmental Protection Agency?s lead hot line, (800) 424-5323, can refer callers to health departments, which will either do soil testing or provide names of local certified labs. ................................ http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2009/08/sludge-white-house-my-response-nyt Sludge & the White House: My Response to the NYT ? By Josh Harkinson | Thu August 13, 2009 Yesterday the New York Times' Home & Garden section finally addressed the story that the White House press corps has dared not bespeak: The possibility that sewage sludge fertilizer has contributed lead and other toxins to the soil in the President's vegetable garden. A few months ago, it was the quaint Garden section that casually broke the news that the White House garden, which had been created by Michelle Obama to the delight of local and organic food advocates, contained 93 parts per million of lead--a level that is higher than natural background levels but not dangerous. The piece led me to wonder if sewage sludge fertilizer, which had been applied to the South Lawn in the past, could be one cause of the lead contamination. That post created a frenzy in the blogosphere as some people made ridiculous claims that the Obamas were poisoning themselves. Lost in the obsession over lead levels (which the White House now says have been reduced to an extremely low 14 ppm) was much of any discussion about why people should be concerned about eating produce from land applied with sludge. So the Times deserves credit for acknowledging the issue, even if its reporting was surprisingly cursory and a bit misleading. Taking issue with my claim that sludge was used on the White House lawn for at least a decade, the Times quoted retired White House gardener Irv Williams, who said it was applied only once, in 1985. When I originally reported on sludge, I had left multiple messages with the White House press office trying to reach Williams or anyone else with the gardening staff, but none of them were returned. So instead, I relied on several stories about sludge and the White House from the '80s and '90s. In 1988, the Washington Post reported that ComPRO was used on the South Lawn "last August." If that's true, then Williams' memory is a bit unreliable. A decade later, the Post reported that ComPRO was being discontinued and that Williams was none too pleased about this. "Meanwhile, along Pennsylvania Avenue, the grounds crew at the White House is preparing for life after ComPRO," the Post reported. "Irv Williams, who has taken care of the White House grounds for 38 years, said they will make due, even though ComPRO has helped the South Lawn." Around the same time, an EPA official told the New Scientist: "The Clintons are walking around on poo, but it's very clean poo." In short, if sludge had long ago been discontinued at the White House, it certainly wasn't the impression being conveyed by government officials. Why could that be? One reason could be that the EPA was very keen on using the White House example as a PR tool for the selling of sludge to home gardeners and agricultural America. So it's ironic that the spin now seems to have changed directions. In an apparent attempt to counter my message that sludge use by the government was common, the Times added, "And in 1994 President Bill Clinton sent a directive to government agencies telling them to start using environmentally friendly practices for landscaping government grounds, like reducing the use of toxic chemicals." Really? Then how do you explain what Williams told the Post in 1999, when asked how he would replace ComPRO: "We'll do the same thing we did before we got it--use grass clippings that decompose and regular commercial fertilizer (my emphasis). More to the point, in September, 2007, the EPA adjusted its government procurement standards for the "landscaping products" category to specifically include "compost made from recovered organic materials," including "compost made from biosolids" (the EPA's term for sludge). The standards recommend that government agencies use only compost that meets this definition. So contrary to the impression conveyed by the Times, it's pretty safe to assume that sludge--with all of its flaws--is still in wide use by the government. At least the paper's gardening section isn't parroting the of Post's "Ornamental Gardener" column of the late '80s, which described ComPRO as "attractive, hummuslike and easy to handle" and conducive to "ideal conditions for healthy root growth." Instead, the Times reports that good sources of organic matter for gardening include "composted leaves, non-acid peat, and well-rotted manure." But sludge? Don't hold your breath. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 14 21:55:49 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 21:55:49 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Family in Tweed Ontario wants full assessment on sludge use on farms Message-ID: WATCH THE VIDEO: http://www.ckwstv.com/index.cfm?page=news&id=1072 ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// SLUDGE PROBLEM: IT'S CALLED BIO-SOLIDS -- BUT MOST PEOPLE KNOW IT AS "SLUDGE". August 13, 2009 NEWSWATCH'S MAX WARK EXPLAINS. THIS IS SLUDGE BEING SPREAD ACROSS A FARMER'S FIELD IN TWEED. THAT BLACK STRIP IN THE DISTANCE IS, FOR THE MOST PART, MADE OF HUMAN WASTE-- SOMETHING THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU SQUEAMISH.... BUT ACCORDING TO THE MINISTRY OF THE ENVIRONMENT... THERE'S NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF. SMITH: "IT WILL HAVE BEEN WELL TREATED BEFORE IT COMES OUT ON THE FIELD. IT'S NOT JUST FLUSHED OUT AND SPREAD ON THE FIELD." SMALL COMFORT FOR SOME, IT SEEMS. AT LEAST ONE RESIDENT HAS VOICED CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROCESS.... SHE'S WORRIED ABOUT HEALTH RISKS FROM EITHER BREATHING THE FUMES FROM THE WASTE.... OR POSSIBLY DRINKING CONTAMINATED WELL WATER.... AND WHILE SHE DIDN'T WANT TO GO ON CAMERA, AT RISK OF SPARKING RESENTMENT FROM HER FARMING NEIGHBOURS... BUT BRIAN MARISSET DOESN'T HAVE A PROBLEM AIRING HIS OPINION... HE'S BOTH AN ORGANIC FARMER AND COUNTY COUNCILLOR. MARISSET: "THERE'S JUST TOO MANY UNKNOWNS WITH SLUDGE. THE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN VERY RELUCTANT TO DO ANY FULL SPECTRUM TESTING." PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY HAS MADE IT'S DECISION ABOUT THE USE OF SLUDGE... SHANNON: "THE COUNTY OF PRINCE EDWARD WILL NOT BE DOING SLUDGE SPREADING." AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF DEBATE, COUNTY COUNCIL VOTED IN FAVOUR OF PUTTING A MORATORIUM ON THE SPREADING OF SLUDGE TWO YEARS AGO. NOW THEY TREAT IT AND TRUCK IT OFF FOR SAFE DISPOSAL INSTEAD OF GIVING IT TO LOCAL FARMERS. SHANNON: "IT'S CERTAINLY MORE COSTLY THAN FORMER PROCESS WAS BUT IT IS RELATIVELY EFFICIENT." COST SEEMS TO BE THE MAIN REASON WHY ANY FARM WOULD USE SLUDGE. SAVING UP TO 100 DOLLARS AN ACRE, MANY FARMERS CAN RE-COUP A GREAT DEAL OF CASH BY BROKERING A DEAL WITH A MUNICIPALITY FOR THEIR SLUDGE AS OPPOSED TO USING FERTILIZER. MARISSET: "ANYTHING THEY DO TO SQUEEZE THAT EXTRA NICKEL THEY'LL DO IT." THE FAMILY IN TWEED WOULD LIKE THE MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT TO DO A FULL ASSESSMENT OF THE LOCAL AIR AND WATER. IF NOTHING ELSE, THE PROCESS WOULD AT LEAST ENSURE TEMPORARY PEACE OF MIND IN THE ONGOING SLUDGE DEBATE.... WITHOUT RAISING TOO MUCH OF A STINK WITH HER NEIGHBOURS. MAX WARK, CKWS NEWSWATCH, PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY. IT'S CALLED BIO-SOLIDS -- BUT MOST PEOPLE KNOW IT AS "SLUDGE". FARMERS USE IT AS FERTILIZER FOR THEIR CROPS. WITH THE JURY STILL OUT ON THE POSSIBLE HEALTH RISKS OF MIXING HUMAN WASTE WITH SOIL, A TWEED RESIDENT IS HOPING TO PUT AN END TO THE SPREADING OF SLUDGE IN THEIR AREA. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 15 13:23:49 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:23:49 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Documentary trailer: We are what we eat - killing the topsoil Message-ID: This is 'We are what we eat' part .25. It is only two and a half minutes long...but well done. Watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdWMdc0dXv0&NR=1 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 15 13:26:14 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 13:26:14 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Toronto's failed organics compost program Message-ID: Toronto's incompetent (and deceitful) food waste organics program. You see that it fell to the Toronto Star to undertake this expose on the Toronto 'source separated organics' (SSO) program. THe Province has stepped in to investigate. The failure of this program has been staring Toronto in the face as each of its 'compost' sites gets shut down by court cases and by violations. But some 'waste diversion' so-called environmentalists have been acting as apologists for these illegal stink holes...suggesting that this mess is somehow environmentally friendly and turning a blind eye to the expensive nightmare. Composting is supposed to make soil ammendments to enrich the soil and assist gardening and farming. It is not supposed to make toxic soil - or stink out its neighbours. Toronto needs to be taken out to the woodshed for its smug indifference to this pillaging of the environment and the public purse. Here is the whole series of stories in this excellent expose from the Toronto Star. .................................................. INVESTIGATION TheStar.com | G Green bins: A wasted effort? COLIN MCCONNELL/TORONTO STAR Toronto compost fares poorly Letter in response to Green bin reports Tonnes of garbage in a gravel pit Raccoon green bin strategy Green bins: A wasted effort? Deep flaws mar recycling program as tons of organics end up in landfills or are turned into compost so toxic it kills plants Jul 04, 2009 Moira Welsh Staff Reporter The City of Toronto boasts that its green bin program diverts a third of our garbage and turns it into "black gold" compost. But a Star investigation shows that the program ? although nobly conceived ? is a sham. There are two problems. First, the city's claim of how much waste the program diverts from landfill is inflated. Second, some of the compost that is being produced will kill your plants because of its high salt content, according to laboratory tests. The Star found that, over the past two years, thousands of tons of organics in various stages of the composting process have been dumped into a gravel pit, tossed into landfills or stockpiled on city property. What's more, some of the material residents are told to place in green bins ? plastic bags and diapers ? has wound up in the belly of a Michigan incinerator, despite Mayor David Miller's vow Toronto will never burn garbage. City residents deserve better, say compost experts. At least $15 million of taxpayers' money goes to truck and treat the organic waste. "Toronto homeowners put a lot of time and energy into separating their kitchen organics," says Jim Graham, chair of the Ontario Waste Management Association. "Residents have the right to expect the processors to do their job ? and to create high-quality compost of consumer grade that they can use on their gardens." Toronto Mayor David Miller was too busy with the strike to comment, a spokesman told the Star on Thursday. Geoff Rathbone, the city official in charge of the organic program, told the Star what happens to the organic matter "is not of concern to us" because it's the provincial Ministry of the Environment's job to enforce standards on processors. The green bin program began in 2002, and today 510,000 Toronto homeowners dutifully separate garbage and put the organic waste into green bins for curbside pickup. Compared to the pure organic programs in Durham and Peel regions, Toronto's was flawed from the start. After public consultations, the city chose the simplest system for homeowners, encouraging plastic bag liners and the inclusion of diapers, neither of which can be composted. The city proudly states that the compost it produces is "safe to use in gardens and lawns." Tests conducted for the Star by A&L Canada, a leading agricultural laboratory, found serious problems with compost produced by two separate companies contracted by the city to process the organic waste. In one case, the lab found the compost was unfinished, meaning it was rushed through the process, in which micro-organisms break the waste down into a high-nutrient soil conditioner. In the second case, the sodium content of compost given out at Toronto's Environment Days was so high that it would kill plants. (More curing time would have removed naturally occurring sodium in vegetables and the salt we add to food.) The Star also looked at the city's so-called "diversion rate," the markers by which recycling programs are judged. Critics say Toronto's one-third rate is inflated. Miller's re-election promise in 2006 vowed to ramp up diversion rates to 70 per cent by 2010, so there's pressure on the city to claim the highest possible rate. Toronto's annual output of 120,000 tons of organics has created a mad scramble for processors. In each of 2007 and 2008, the city shipped 1,000 truckloads to Quebec. By the time the green bin waste arrived, locked inside plastic bags the city wants residents to use, it was sometimes so rotten it went straight to landfill, says Quebec's environment ministry. Some processors can't handle liquefied rotten material. That burns Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, who has spent years trying to track the organic waste. "We have an unwritten rule with the public that the green bin system will have integrity, and the materials they put in the bins will be reused in a meaningful way," Minnan-Wong says. "When the food ends up landfilled, or when the compost is toxic, then you are betraying the principles and the reasons why we have this program to begin with." Two major compost processors hired by the city to handle the waste ? such as leftover steak, banana peels and all those diapers ? have been hit with provincial restrictions due to neighbourhood odour complaints. Within the past two months, before the municipal garbage strike began, Orgaworld Canada in London was severely limited in the amount of organics it could process while Universal Resource Recovery in Welland was shut down entirely. Follow the trail of Toronto's organics, and the flaws in the system emerge. The Star found that Orgaworld, which processes about 40 per cent of Toronto's organic waste, has been sending thousands of tons of "residual" plastics to be burned in Detroit. It turns out about one-fifth of Toronto's organic output is being burned or buried in landfills. The city tells residents to put diapers into their green bins. Graham of the Ontario Waste Management Association also owns Try-Recycling in London. He said the diapers are considered diverted when placed in the compost stream, but are immediately screened out. "Makes for good diversion numbers, but they end up in the landfill anyway," he said. Add to that the plastic Toronto wants homeowners to line their bins with. In Durham and Peel, residents are told to buy compostable bags. Toronto has built a multi-million-dollar system that is sup posed to separate organic waste from non-compostable plastic bags. (It is also planning two new local processing facilities, at a cost of roughly $65 million, using the same technology.) But plastics make the food rot quickly, causing odour problems for processors, and large shreds of plastic end up in the compost. Nobody wants to see the green bin program scrapped, just made better. Susan Antler, executive director of the Composting Council of Canada, says some municipalities, such as Durham, are "shining stars." They impose strict limits ? no plastic bags, no diapers, and no dog feces and kitty litter. (The latter two are both allowed in Toronto, with feces contributing to odour issues and kitty litter putting clay into the compost.) "Garbage in means garbage out," Antler says. Orgaworld founder Henk Kaskens, who is based in the Netherlands, came to London, Ont., last month to deal with "the fuss" created when the environment ministry ordered Orgaworld to limit its daily intake of green bin material to five trucks, or about 150 tons. Before that it was taking about 1,000 tons a day. (The order was lifted recently, but a new investigation is underway.) The environment ministry says it has logged 170 odour complaints against Orgaworld since January. At the same time the ministry hit Orgaworld with the limits, it closed down the second largest processor of Toronto's organic waste, Welland's Universal. The ministry told Universal it had logged 120 complaints of odours such as smells akin to "vomit" or "dead animals" since the facility opened last fall. Toronto was caught in a vice, with nowhere to turn, because all but one of its other processors were facing ministry limitations or Environment Act charges. Universal general manager Gerald Pratt said his company is taking the odour issues very seriously and is working very hard to fix the problems at the plant. The problem caused Toronto to stockpile 3,000 tons of organics in city transfer stations ? long before the strike began. Orgaworld's Kaskens, who said he makes "the best compost in Ontario," invited the Star for a tour of his plant. He said the odour problems resulted from ducts that crashed from the walls to the floor because a subcontractor had not properly fastened them. He complained the environment ministry is too enforcement-focused and scares away future investments. Inside the cavernous plant are huge piles of food waste, plastic bags ripped open. Kaskens said his technology turns organics into compost in just 12 to 14 days. The ministry requires it be held another 21 days, but "it is not necessary." The Composting Council's Antler and numerous other industry leaders said they have never heard of compost that can be finished in 12 days. It takes up to six months to cure compost, Antler said. Kaskens pointed out the piles of residual waste, the plastics, in his plant. He said they are trucked to Detroit for incineration. Neither the city nor compost companies could put a firm figure on the amount of non-organic residuals that are burned or landfilled, giving figures that vary from 15 to 22 per cent and higher. Welland's Universal general manager Gerald Pratt put it at 26 per cent, primarily plastic shopping bags. Toronto's organic waste has a "great deal of contaminants in it," Pratt wrote in a June letter to a Michigan landfill he hoped would help him after his plant closed. The Michigan landfill's manager, Dan Gudgel, said in an interview he could not compost Universal's organics because the contamination meant it would take too long to get Michigan government approvals. "I hear you have a state of emergency up there," he said. Moira Welsh can be reached at 416- 869-4073 or mwelsh at thestar ////////////////////////////////////////// http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/660862 How tons of rotting garbage ended up in a gravel pit Toronto compost fares poorly Letter in response to Green bin reports Tonnes of garbage in a gravel pit Raccoon green bin strategy Green bins: A wasted effort? Jul 04, 2009 04:30 AM Be the first to comment on this article... There is an air of mystery about Toronto's compost. Following its trail is no simple task. The Star discovered that thousands of tons of what provincial officials called "putrescible waste," or partially finished compost, was trucked last year from Orgaworld, the main processor of Toronto's green bin waste, and dumped at Nicli Aggregates, a gravel pit outside London. That much is known. But it remains unclear why the compost was transported to the gravel pit. In a recent interview, Orgaworld founder Henk Kaskens said it was sent there because a local man, Jack Hermans, wanted to sell it for Orgaworld. "He was not very successful," Kaskens adds. But Hermans, whose trucking business is next door to Nicli, says he was "contracted by Orgaworld to take (the compost) and finish it for them." When asked why material from Toronto's largest processing facility was left in a gravel pit, Geoff Rathbone, the city official in charge of the organic program, said he could not comment because he did not know the details. After receiving complaints about the smell, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources ordered that the compost be removed from the gravel pit. Killins Farms in nearby Dorchester agreed to have it dumped in piles on a field. John Killins and Travis Woollings, partners in the 1,600-hectare farm, are now trying to sell Orgaworld's compost to local farmers. And Woollings enthusiastically sings its praises. But when he reaches into the dark pile and grabs a handful, he plucks out shreds of plastic and glass. "You could tell the residents of Toronto to be more careful what they put in their green bins," he says, shaking his head. Woollings says he's had the compost tested and found it was rich in nutrients. "The sodium is a bit high though," he adds. Woollings provided a bag of compost upon request. During the two-hour drive from London to Toronto, the smell of ammonia went from bad to indescribable. /////////////////////////////////////// http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/660864 Toronto compost fares poorly in tests Report error or complaint Toronto compost fares poorly Letter in response to Green bin reports Tonnes of garbage in a gravel pit Raccoon green bin strategy Green bins: A wasted effort? Jul 04, 2009 04:30 AM Comments on this story (3) The Toronto Star had A&L Canada Laboratories test compost from retail stores and two city-contracted compost facilities. One city sample was taken from Killins Farms in Dorchester, Ont., which sells compost from Orgaworld, Toronto's largest processor. The second came from an Environment Day giveaway. It was partially treated at the city's Dufferin processor and finished at All Treat Farms. Toronto's compost did not fare well. Orgaworld's was mineral-rich, but had not finished composting. Its levels of potentially plant-damaging sodium were 30 per cent; the recommended maximum is 2 per cent. The compost was acceptable only for soil amendment and agricultural use, not gardens. Orgaworld says its compost is regularly tested and complies fully with the Ontario Environment Ministry rules laid down in its operating permit. The Environment Day sample was also rich in minerals, but again had high sodium levels. The lab recommended it be mixed carefully with other soil. "If you just put this in a pot, it would kill your plants," says A&L president Greg Patterson. All Treat Farms blames salt-laden foods for the high sodium levels. It recommends mixing one part compost with four parts soil. Patterson says the Composting Council of Canada's recommendations of how to mix and use a compost product should become an industry-wide standard. "Without this," he says, "it is just hit and miss." ////////////////////////////////////////// http://www.thestar.com/unassigned/article/661902 Province steps in to fix green bin mess COLIN MCCONNELL/TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO Mayor David Miller, showing how the city's green bins work in a 2004 photo op, is now under fire after the Star revealed flaws in the program. Toronto compost fares poorly Letter in response to Green bin reports Tonnes of garbage in a gravel pit Raccoon green bin strategy Green bins: A wasted effort? Green bins: A wasted effort? The City of Toronto boasts that its green bin program diverts a third of our garbage and turns it into "black gold" compost. But a Star investigation shows that the program ? although nobly conceived ? is a sham.Crackdown on recycling programs after Star probe found organic matter ended up burned or in dumps Jul 07, 2009 04:30 AM Moira Welsh STAFF REPORTER Ontario has launched a province-wide probe into municipal green bin programs after a Star investigation found serious flaws with the organics program in Toronto. "We have to fix these problems," Environment Minister John Gerretsen said. "I want to change the regulations out there and I want greater oversight from the beginning to the end of the process," he added, in an interview that followed the Star's revelations over the weekend about Toronto's organics program. The probe discovered that thousands of tonnes of green bin materials ended up in gravel pits and landfill or ? in the case of plastic bags and diapers ? was burned. As well, tests conducted by the newspaper revealed extremely high salt content in the compost that was produced, making it a killer for plants. Gerretsen said he now realizes the provincial regulations governing organic programs are out of date and standard rules are needed for all communities. The Star stories compared Toronto's organics program, which allows contamination by plastics and diapers, with that in Durham Region, whose pure organics program is considered a "shining star" of composting. Unfinished Toronto organics have been dumped in a gravel pit. Food waste was put in a landfill in Quebec or stockpiled in city transfer stations. Two of the main processors hired to turn green bin material into compost have faced repeated restrictions from the provincial environment ministry. Meanwhile, Mayor David Miller maintained his silence. Last Thursday, a spokesman said the mayor was too busy to speak, due to the ongoing municipal workers' strike. Yesterday, the head of Toronto's organics program sent the Star a letter asking "our citizens" to continue to have faith in the green bin program. "Despite some minor growing pains, Toronto's green bin program is one of the most effective in North America," wrote Geoff Rathbone, general manager of the city's solid waste management services. Rathbone said the city accurately records the amount of organic material diverted from landfill, but his letter did not give that amount. Instead, Rathbone quoted a 44 per cent diversion rate, a figure the city has previously said represents all of the garbage diverted from landfill ? both organics and recycling. The city's website says 30 per cent of the waste stream is diverted through the organics program. A provincial monitoring agency, on the other hand, says Toronto has an 18 per cent organics diversion rate. The city is under pressure to increase diversion rates after Miller promised in the 2006 election to see 70 per cent of Toronto's garbage diverted by 2010. That goal surpasses the Liberal government's push for 60 per cent. Yesterday, as the province started poring over regulations, a coalition of 11 Toronto councillors called on Miller to halt the city's $65 million plan for two new organic waste processors ? which would use the same plastic- and diaper-friendly technology ? until a full city probe is done on the program. The councillors are frustrated with the lack of transparency and say they simply don't know how much organic matter ends up as compost and how much as landfill. The mostly right-wing and centre politicians who form the "Responsible Government Group" want the city's auditor general to scrutinize the multimillion-dollar program and determine whether residents are getting value for money. "It is important because the green bin program has been a failure in terms of what the public expectations are," said Case Ootes, the group's chairman. "Some of this is ending up in landfill. Plastic bags are being incinerated. This is not what the mayor promised." Miller has been a vocal opponent of incineration in any form, although it is used widely across Europe and in Peel Region. Councillor Brian Ashton said the group wants an "immediate review" in light of the city's plans to spend millions of dollars on new processing centres. Toronto already has one such facility. It uses a giant spool to separate food waste from plastic bags. Thousands of tonnes of recovered plastic are shipped to landfill. The facility partially processes the organic waste and ships the "digestate" material to a composting company paid to complete the job. But critics say plastics are extremely hard to separate from the organic material. "Garbage in, garbage out," they say. And plastic liner bags make the contents putrefy more quickly and create odour problems. The new facilities are supposed to handle the additional waste expected as the green bin program expands to include large apartment and condo buildings. But they will not be able to handle all of it. Toronto is also trying to expand its contract with Orgaworld, a processor in London, Ont., that uses a much different system. Orgaworld faced ministry limitations this spring because of odour problems. Those limits have since been lifted, but a new investigation is underway. Rathbone's letter explains why officials chose to allow plastics in the organics: "Toronto's program was created to maximize convenience for residents, which included being able to use plastic bags and to accept hard-to-process materials such as diapers. "Other jurisdictions with different housing characteristics may not need to allow plastic bags, but Toronto, with 500,000 multi-family homes, does." Experts say food waste sticks to the plastic so organics are sent to the landfill or incinerator with the rest of the "residuals." And the diapers can't be properly composted and end up buried or burned. Rathbone challenged that assumption, saying the Dufferin St. processing facility has no problem dealing with plastics from bags or diapers. "The city is also able to handle the diapers in a way that may not be familiar to your quoted experts," he said. The Star's investigation found that much of the compost created by city-paid processors was of low quality ? too unfinished or harmfully high in salt. Rathbone said it's meant to be used as a "soil conditioner and should be mixed with soil at a ratio of 1 part compost to 4 parts soil." An accredited laboratory hired by the Star tested samples from two city facilities and eight compost products purchased at major retailers such as Wal-Mart and Canadian Tire. Compost from the retail stores, by comparison, was quite good. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 14 22:06:36 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 22:06:36 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> San Diego must meet Clean Water Act: Calif Coastal Commission overrules EPA, staff, and state water regulators Message-ID: http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/aug/13/bn13waiver151824/ San Diego loses major sewage treatment battle By Mike Lee Union-Tribune Staff Writer August 13, 2009 In a dramatic defeat for San Diego, the California Coastal Commission on Thursday denied the city's request to continue operating the region's main sewage treatment facility below the minimum pollution standard. San Diego is expected to appeal to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce for its third waiver from the Clean Water Act. If that fails, it could be on the hook for paying up to $1.5 billion to upgrade its Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant. The city would likely have to raise sewer rates to help pay for such a project. At their monthly meeting in San Francisco, the coastal commissioners voted against the recommendations of their staff, state water-quality regulators and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. They left some of San Diego's advocates in shock and overjoyed environmentalists who have fought the exemption for years. ?Today's vote finally settles the issue in California that the ocean is a not a garbage pail,? said Joey Racano, a vocal opponent of San Diego's waiver request. The Point Loma plant treats sewage from 2.2 million people inside and outside the city limits, and it discharges about 170 million gallons a day into the Pacific Ocean. It's by far the largest wastewater facility in the nation that doesn't meet the federal threshold of ?secondary? treatment. Mayor Jerry Sanders has worked for more than two years to convince regulators that San Diego is meeting the terms of its current exemption and should be permitted to keep processing sewage without a major retrofit. The city seemed to be headed for success after collecting support from the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, the EPA, the Coastal Commission's technical experts and some environmentalists. That changed Thursday morning after Pat Kruer, a veteran coastal commissioner from Rancho Santa Fe, made a motion to support the city's waiver application. Approval from the panel would have allowed the EPA to finalize its own signoff for the third exemption. Much to Kruer's surprise, no one supported him. ?It was one of the most bizarre things I have seen in 10 years,? he said. ?I don't understand how we arrived at this point. The only rationale I heard them say was that it's time to do it and why should San Diego be exempt?? The commission's move has precedent. In 2002, it initially rejected a previous exemption application by the city because of concerns about pollution, environmental monitoring and efforts to use more recycled water. Eventually, the commission consented to the waiver ? San Diego's second. San Diego utilities director Jim Barrett said Thursday that he expects to appeal the commission's denial once that agency formalizes its reasoning, likely by October. The current waiver remains in force until the issue is resolved and the Point Loma plant will continue operating. Barrett said the city plans to follow through on an 18-month study of the regional wastewater system. That project is designed to highlight chances to recycle more water and thus limit ocean discharges from the Point Loma plant. One main barrier to improving the treatment system is the lack of space at the Point Loma facility, which is wedged between the Cabrillo National Monument and Navy land. Building upward would cost more money. Smaller sewage loads ? the result of greater wastewater recycling ? could free up space and reduce the need for the more expensive upgrades. Mike Lee: (619) 542-4570; From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sat Aug 15 23:20:53 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2009 23:20:53 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Tamiflu survives sewage treatment - patients already infected with resistant strains Message-ID: http://www.examiner.com/x-11513-Seattle-StayatHome-Moms-Examiner~y2009m8d14-August-14-2009-Tamiflu-resistant-swine-flu-in-King-County August 14, 2009: Tami-flu resistant swine flu in King County News : August 14, 2009 The health department announced that two patients with a Tamiflu-resistant swine flu are being treated in King County. Both patients did not know each other, one is a male teenager and the other is a woman in her 40s. Tamiflu is an antiviral medication used to treat the flu. One of the patients is in full recovery while the other patient is using a different antiviral treatment. Health officials say that Tamiflu-resistant swine flu cases are not common. *************************************************************** July 3, 2009 http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=a9GPdD61pf30 Tamiflu-Resistant Swine Flu Virus Found in Hong Kong (Update2) By Nipa Piboontanasawat and Jason Gale July 3 (Bloomberg) -- Tamiflu-resistant swine flu was found in a teenager who hadn?t taken Roche Holding AG?s best-selling antiviral medicine, Hong Kong?s health department said. The city?s Public Health Laboratory Services Branch identified the drug-evading variant during routine surveillance of flu specimens, the department said in a statement today. This marks the first known case of Tamiflu resistance in a swine flu patient not treated with the drug, which has been stockpiled by governments worldwide to fight pandemic influenza. The specimen was collected from a 16-year-old girl who flew from San Francisco and was intercepted by officials at Hong Kong International Airport on June 11, according to the statement. ?Picking it up in a patient who was not treated is a cause for concern,? Malik Peiris, professor of microbiology at Hong Kong University, said in an interview. ?One case doesn?t change the world, but if we are seeing more and more cases in patients who are not treated, then I think it would be more serious.? The patient, who was admitted to Queen Mary Hospital for isolation, tested positive for the new H1N1 flu strain and opted not to take Tamiflu, Hong Kong?s health department said. She had mild symptoms and was discharged upon recovery on June 18. Denmark, Japan ****************************************************************************** http://www.innovations-report.com/html/reports/life_sciences/report-92122.html Tamiflu survives sewage treatment next article 04.10.2007 Swedish researchers have discovered that oseltamivir (Tamiflu), an antiviral drug used to prevent and mitigate influenza infections, is not removed or degraded during normal sewage treatment. Consequently, in countries where Tamiflu is used at a high frequency, there is a risk that its concentration in natural waters can reach levels where influenza viruses in nature will develop resistance to it. Widespread resistance of viruses in nature to Tamiflu increases the risk that influenza viruses infecting humans will become resistant to one of the few medicines currently available for treating influenza. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 16 09:42:16 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 09:42:16 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> WERF - renewable energy from sludge Message-ID: Format is better if you read the pdf version http://images.vertmarkets.com/crlive/files/downloads/85a013b6-0ec9-417f-a253-c6817ccdb49c/WERF-EnergyOpportunitiesInWastewater.pdf As seen in the 08/11/09 edition of the Water Online (www.wateronline.com) newsletter. Energy Opportunities In Wastewater And Biosolids By Glenn Reinhardt, WERF Executive Director The energy potential contained in wastewater and biosolids exceeds by ten times the energy used to treat it, and can potentially meet up to 12% of the national electricity demand. That?s enough to power New York City, Houston, Dallas, and Chicago annually. U.S. wastewater treatment plants produce only a small quantity of the energy they need. In order to broaden new energy creation, so that every community can take advantage of the opportunities, the wastewater sector must develop and deploy new practices, technologies, and information in wastewater and biosolids management research. The work requires substantial and immediate investments to support President Obama?s efforts to ensure that 10% of the United States? electricity needs come from renewable sources by 2012, and 25% by 2025. Water and wastewater treatment operations have the potential to be net energy producers; they represent 3% of the total electricity consumption in the United States. Wastewater treatment utilities in the United States consume an estimated 21 billion kilowatt hours per year, enough to power New York metro area, including Nassau-Suffolk and Orange counties, for a year. Some of the world?s best-performing wastewater treatment plants can produce 100% of the energy they need to operate. These plants optimize their operations, implement resource recovery and reuse options, and employ new technologies. An essential component of their selfsufficiency is recovering energy and resources from biosolids or sludge. Without a concerted effort to help wastewater treatment facilities become net energy producers, they will continue to demand substantial energy to operate. As regulations become increasingly stringent, facilities must use more advanced treatment, resulting in increased energy consumption. Since electrical energy demand represents 30% of a typical wastewater utility?s operational costs, responsible municipal utilities are exploring energy and resource recovery opportunities throughout the plant. As seen in the 08/11/09 edition of the Water Online (www.wateronline.com) newsletter. Wastewater Energy Potential Is Tremendous Researchers have measured the energy content of raw wastewater samples and determined that it exceeds the electricity requirements for treatment by a factor of 9.3 to 1. That means that domestic wastewater, which has organic matter with embedded energy content, contains almost ten times the energy needed to treat it. Researchers can calculate the energy available nationally from domestic wastewater, in wastewater solids, or producible as biogas. They estimate the energy embedded in wastewater, and the relative percentage of the U.S. national energy needs that may be met by renewable and embedded energy from all wastewater sources (including solids fraction), to be between 2% and 12% of the national electricity demand. The potential is tremendous, but there are limitations. Although emerging technologies are promising, none of the processes available today can fully extract all of the energy available in wastewater without further investment in their research and development. WERF is funding research that is developing new technologies, such as reconfiguring the microbial-based treatment processes to function as a microbial fuel cell and generate current. More robust investment in this research would expedite concepts proven in laboratory settings to be scaled up to pilot or even demonstration scale. Researchers are also examining physical, mechanical, biological, and chemical processes that can contribute to energy recovery or reduce energy demand. Biosolids Management Can Produce Energy Now Today, wastewater treatment facilities can generate some energy by producing a dewatered or dried product to burn at a power generating station or cement plants; or by anaerobic digestion and generation of biogas (methane). Most large wastewater treatment plants have some type of heat energy recovery, either from combined heat and power cogeneration or incineration processes. The 16,583 publicly owned wastewater treatment facilities in the United States produce over 64 pounds of biosolids per person, every year. The United States produces 7.2 million metric tons of ?dry solids? ? biosolids with the water taken out of it ? annually. Currently, plants incinerate or landfill 45% of the biosolids and treat and land apply 49%. That leaves only 6% for other purposes such as energy production. Research investments in approaches to maximize energy recovery from this great untapped potential would cut back the amount of biosolids incinerated or landfilled and improve the U.S. energy security. As of 2004, 1006 public wastewater facilities used anaerobic digesters (digestion without air) to process biosolids, producing methane gas. Nineteen percent of wastewater plants with anaerobic digesters generate power with digester gas (biogas). The biogas is a source of heat or a source of fuel for direct-drive combustion engines to make steam in boilers, or plants can sell it. The other 81% of wastewater facilities waste the biogas by using the common practice of flaring or burning their emission without heat or energy capture. Further research tailored to these facilities that flare their emission would maximize their energy capture and minimize waste. Biosolids-To-Energy Technologies Improved knowledge through research is needed to capture more of the energy in wastewater biosolids, optimize biogas production, or capture energy from biosolids by other means. The production of biogas can be improved by codigestion (adding organic waste products from other sources to increase gas production); solids pretreatment technologies (also to increase gas production); and better anaerobic digestion (often by thermophilic, or heat-requiring, and phased digestion processes). Plants can augment the efficiency of energy conversion from biogas by improving gas treatment (to remove contaminants and concentrate the gas), improving engines to generate more power and electricity with reduced emissions, and improving the adaptability and cost-efficiency of using biogas as a renewable fuel (in Stirling engines, fuel cells, or through the methane market). Investment in research to improve on these approaches will encourage wider use and dissemination among treatment plants of varying sizes and capabilities. Physical, thermal, chemical, and biologic processes can recover energy from biosolids. While these approaches are less understood than anaerobic digestion of wastewater solids, researchers are confident they will provide additional means to recover energy. New technologies or approaches that are gaining acceptance include thermal solidification, fermentation, wet air oxidation, gasification, pyrolysis, and some proprietary processes, such as supercritical water oxidation. Many of these technologies or approaches have only been demonstrated in laboratories or at a small scale, and more research is necessary to make them mainstream solids management options. Pyrolysis is a technology that likely has application at wastewater biosolids handling facilities. This technology transforms carbon-based material or waste, in the absence of air and at temperatures around 600oC, into a substance called ?char.? Char can be gasified into a product called syngas, a combustible mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, or it can be further processed into biodiesel. It can also be burned directly. The syngas and biodiesel products can cogenerate power from combustion engines with recovery of heat and power. The Stamford (CT) wastewater facility is building one of the newest applications of the gasification technology for wastewater solids. It estimates that if all of the wastewater treatment plants nationwide used gasification technology, the output would power 2 million households per day. Research investment is needed to tap this great resource. Turning Promising Ideas Into Reality Wastewater treatment operations are essential to the protection of the environment and public health. They are also agents of innovation and can help achieve the goals of energy selfsufficiency and greenhouse gas reductions as set forth by President Obama. However, substantial investment in research is necessary. To capture and use energy from wastewater and its resulting biosolids, investments of some $100 million must be made in research over the next 10 years to: 1. Improve the utilization of biogas to produce energy ($20 million) 2. Identify and develop the emerging biosolids-to-energy technologies that show the greatest promise, so that wastewater facilities can understand and cost-effectively use them ($30 million) 3. Explore concepts that extract energy from wastewater, such as microbial fuel cells, or that produce or use other energy byproducts from wastewater like hydrogen or nitrous oxide ($50 million). Potential energy resources, in the form of wastewater, are available in every community across America. Investment in research can make that energy available. About The Author Glenn Reinhardt is the executive director of the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF). As WERF?s first employee, Glenn was instrumental in founding the organization in 1989. He is a graduate of the University of Florida, and resides with his family in Annapolis, MD. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 16 10:45:13 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 10:45:13 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Rose George - Answers Human Waste Sanitation Questions in NYTimes Message-ID: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/12/answers-about-human-waste/ August 12, 2009, 12:49 pm Answers About Human Waste and Sanitation By The New York Times Taking Questions Ask About Human Waste Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters,? responds to readers. Following is the first set of answers from Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters.? We are no longer accepting questions for this feature. On more than several occasions, I have been overwhelmed by the effluvia pouring through subway stations. My questions are simple: what is this waste, and what can be done (or is being done) to remove it from the subways? I remember a movie I saw when I was 8; in one scene, aliens jumped out of the sewer and subway fluids underground. My mind often casts back to those images, and something says to me that this waste should not be so close and that it might be very dirty and very harmful. ? Posted by Phishaw What is being done in the city to address the problem of combined sewer overflows? I hear this can be a major problem after heavy rainstorms. ? Posted by Jay I?d be interested to know what the weather was like on the days you encountered the subway effluvia. I?d also be interested to know what you mean by ?effluvia.? I suspect it was water and muck, rather than sewage. Water is a terrible trial for the people trying to keep New York?s sewers running as they should. (I?ll get to what sewers have to do with subways in a minute.) It?s a problem of history and capacity: The sewer system was mostly installed borough by borough, so it was somewhat piecemeal, and it was also built for a much smaller population. The volumes going into the system have now increased not just because the city?s residents have increased significantly in number, but also because of humans? pesky fondness for concreting over everything in sight. Most of the city?s sewers are what is known as a ?combined sewer system,? which means they take in all surface water as well. Almost everything that goes down a street drain goes into the sewer. By concreting over turf and earth, we are removing vast areas that surface water could drain into, so it has nowhere else to go but the sewer. For this reason, I usually scowl at paved driveways. It?s also why the government in Britain, where I live, wants to change the planning system so that people have to get planning officials? permission to pave over permeable surfaces. All those factors together mean that the system can be overwhelmed much more easily than you would think: A short, sharp rainstorm can do it. The city tries to alleviate pressure on the system by installing storm tanks, which simply hold the excess until it can be treated. But when these fill up fast, there is nothing to do but discharge the ?storm water? (actually sewage and storm water) into the nearest water body. The federal Environmental Protection Agency estimates that there are 40,000 ?Sanitary Sewer Overflows? every year in the United States. It is not ideal, but wastewater treatment managers say they have no choice. Several have told me that ?we either discharge it into the water or it ends up in people?s basements.? In the summer of 2007, for example, 3.5 inches of rain fell in two hours in Manhattan, and 4.26 inches in Brooklyn. The subway system failed because its pumps could not cope with all that water. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority blamed the city?s Department of Environmental Protection, saying it couldn?t pump the water because the sewers were already full; an investigation by the M.T.A. (pdf) subsequently found that drainage was impeded by debris on the tracks and badly maintained valves. There is also the unresolved issue of a fundamental design flaw in wastewater infrastructure, one that goes right back to the city fathers who visited Hamburg, Germany, in the late 19th century to check out its combined sewer system, and sadly (for us ? for them it made perfect sense at the time) decided that it was a good idea. Enjoyed/appreciated your book. Until 1992, New York City dumped all its sewage sludge farther and farther out in the ocean. Now, essentially all that raw material is processed into fertilizer products; over 50 percent is made into into pellets at a local plant and marketed on the East Coast, and more than 70 percent of the total meets federal Class A standards. That?s good environmental progress, right? (The city?s manufacturing decline, plus good industrial pretreatment programs, also help.) ? Posted by MortonBoy Thanks for your ? and other commenters? ? compliments about the book; I?m pleased you enjoyed it. Now, to the thorny and divisive issue of sludge. My book was criticized for not coming to a decision about the rights or wrongs of what most Western industrialized nations do with sludge, and the criticism was fair, because I don?t know the answers. What I do know is that debate is healthy and that sludge provokes a lot of it, not least when it is used on agricultural land. Sludge is the dirt that remains when sewage is cleaned into effluent. As such, it is the worst of what is in sewage, but it also contains good stuff like nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus (essential nutrients that the world is running out of). The nutrients can harm the sea, since they can create excessive algae growth, which in turn removes essential oxygen, leading to suffocated waters. But the nutrients also mean that human excrement can make good fertilizer as long as it is properly treated (e.g., composting). But critics of ?biosolids,? as sludge is sometimes called, point out that sludge is not pure human excrement, and that is the problem. It?s true that New York City, for example, may have a product that, in these post-industrialized days, is less contaminated with industrial waste, and pretreatment programs are always a good idea. But even aside from industry, sewage contains things that we might not want in fertilizer. There is increasing research done on pharmaceutical products in sewage and drinking water; in chemicals we use unthinkingly, every day (from shampoo to floor bleach); in pesticide that ends up in the water system from agricultural runoff. Some scientists point out that these are trace elements, and that you would have to drink a lakeful of water to get enough ibuprofen to cause harm; others have found that even trace elements of pesticides can combine to have harmful effects on frogs, fish and other aquatic life. I am careful not to pronounce on the safety of biosolids. The E.P.A.?s position is that they are acceptable fertilizer if its rules and regulations are followed. But the Netherlands and Switzerland have banned them; farmers? unions in France (a country that loves its pesticides), Germany and Sweden are against its use. I don?t know what the rights and wrongs are, but there is some interesting research and debate going on, and I think we would all do well to pay attention to it. Sounds like a great book. An amazing and great topic. Is it possible to make biodiesel out of human waste (not gas but oil), and are there any companies trying to do it? ? Posted by Todd Are there any ways to use the large amount of human waste generated by New York City for the common good, like turning it into drinking water or compost, for example, that would not require a huge financial commitment or a significant change in infrastructure? ? Posted by mheck Human waste is such a misnomer. It is an extremely useful product. As you point out, it can make biogas, for a start. In China, 18 million or so households get their cooking fuel by linking their latrine to a biogas digester (an airtight underground tank), tapping off the methane and cooking with it. It cuts down on deforestation and is cheap and infinite. There is really interesting stuff going on in Europe, too, where Lille in France, Stockholm in Sweden and a few other cities are running buses and taxis on biogas produced from sewage and household garbage. In fact, the only waste about human waste is that it goes to waste; even in the 19th century, Karl Marx calculated that London was losing a fortune by throwing all that potential fertilizer away into its water system. But back to biodiesel: Yes, there are companies working on that, including one in Canada which you can find if you search online for ?biodiesel? and ?human waste.? The trouble with sewage as an energy source is that the technology for now ? even though it?s ancient (Marco Polo reported seeing biogas tanks in China in the 13th century) ? it?s not yet cost-effective. Some wastewater treatment plants get gas or electricity from the process, but by no means all. It is often seen as prohibitively expensive, especially when the plants are struggling to run and meet all sorts of regulations. Money is going into the wastewater infrastructure from the federal stimulus bill, which is great, but I would like to see more of it dedicated to exploiting this chronically and acutely undertapped source of energy. It will cost money, but so did putting in the infrastructure in the first place, and it will probably pay its own way eventually. It?s definitely a chronically and acutely underexploited source of energy. I wonder a lot about the implications of restricting public-access toilets. There is a hilarious (and unfortunately spot-on) article in The Onion headlined ?Search for Public Restroom: An Epic Ordeal of Alienation, Humiliation, Human Cruelty.? I have been near tears because of the absence of an available restroom in major cities? downtowns and on the boardwalk at the New Jersey shore. It is such a basic necessity, and also something everyone wants to ignore and pretend does not exist. For the homeless and otherwise indigent, the problem is a hundred times worse. How can this issue be practically addressed, assuming that most cities cannot afford to build free public toilets everywhere? ? Posted by DMZ The lack of public toilets in major cities is a disgrace. The trouble is two-fold: they cost money to run, and there is little protest when they are closed. They cost money to run because their nature and location ? out of sight, private ? means they are often a lure for criminals, so local authorities, rather than spend money on an attendant, which would usually save money by keeping crime down, prefer to close them. Another problem is that because we are so adaptable, we will find alternatives. How many extra coffees and muffins are bought simply so we can use a restroom in a cafe or restaurant? I am baffled by the low priority given to public toilets. It is a serious problem for the elderly, or for anyone with incontinence problems ? that includes millions of Americans ? and it should be considered a citizen?s right, not a luxury. In Scotland in the 19th century, when public toilets were lavish and plentiful, restrooms were known as Public Necessities. Which they are. In New York, the mayor announced a plan in 2005 to build new street furniture. There were headlines proclaiming that new restrooms would be built. In fact, the plans provided for 3,300 bus shelters, 330 news kiosks, but only 20 public bathrooms. It?s not just New York: 40 percent of public restrooms in Britain have closed in 10 years. I would like to encourage mass protest. People publicly object to library closures: why not toilets? Why do we have to use ?water saving? toilets that require multiple flushes to empty the bowl. Seems like a complete false ?economy,? particularly since we are not running out of water. ? Posted by bruce I think you would find plenty of people in California, Arizona, or any other water-stressed state who would disagree with you. Water supplies are at risk because so little of the world?s water is the fresh kind, and two-thirds of that is locked in snow, ice and permafrost. Vast amounts of what we do have goes to agriculture. The recently released United Nations World Water Development Report estimates that nearly half the world will face severe water stress by 2050. What does this have to do with your low-flow toilet in New York City? Quite a lot. The United States has plentiful water, but it is not immune to water stress. In 2007, half the country suffered drought. It has got so bad in California that Orange County has begun running a water reclamation system (known by critics as ?toilet to tap?). That doesn?t bother me, since the water cycle means that we are all drinking stuff that has gone through a toilet at some point, but it bothers some people. As I pointed out above, a lot of drinking water ends up being used to carry sewage. This doesn?t mean it?s ?lost,? but it requires money and energy to clean it enough to meet drinking water standards, and sometimes ? if it?s evaporated as steam, for example ? it is changed into a less readily available form. So the less water that is used to flush toilets, the better. American toilets, until the 1992 EPACT, used an astonishing 13 gallons of water. I?m all in favor of low-flow toilets but the technology has to be good enough. I know there were problems originally; the speed of the change that EPACT required causes toilet manufacturers to still refer to the mid-1990s as ?the era of clogging.? But toilet design has vastly improved, and I?m surprised that you?re still having trouble. Maybe it?s time to change your toilet? There are various reports out there ? such as this one ? which rate toilets on their flush. The thorough testing process includes the use of miso-filled condoms to stand in for human excrement. As for the wisdom of using drinking water to operate flush toilets in the first place, I?ll leave you with a quote from Teddy Roosevelt. ?Civilized people,? he said in 1910, ?ought to know how to dispose of sewage in some other way than putting it into the drinking water.? ////////////////// Part II August 13, 2009, 1:27 pm Answers About Human Waste and Sanitation, Part 2 By The New York Times Taking Questions Ask About Human Waste Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters,? responds to readers. Biography ? First Set, August 12 ? Third Set, August 14 ? Following is the second set of answers from Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters.? We are no longer accepting questions for this feature. I have not read it, but I did read a long article in the New Yorker, I believe, about the problems of disposing of all this stuff. As the population of the world continues to grow at the rate of 200,000 people per day, do you see any solution? One I?ve thought of for some of the United States is to dry it out in trenches in a desert area, and then cover it over with sand, then maybe excavate in a year or two after the sun bakes it thoroughly. Little energy is involved in drying it out. The few people who live in the desert won?t like it, but, hey, we condemn land for our water supply. Why not this? An additional problem probably not covered in your book is the disposal of atomic waste. Why not encase it in concrete, coat it with glass to prevent corrosion and drop it into the Marianas Trench. Forty thousand feet down is a long way. Nobody?s going to get it. ? Posted by George I know nothing about atomic waste, since my book is specifically about human excrement, so I will stick to the first part of your question. Yours is a big question requiring an enormous and complicated answer, which I certainly do not have space to do justice to here, not least as thousands of good and determined people have spent decades trying to work on a solution to the world?s human waste burden, and they are still working on it. The good news is that the world of sanitation has come on in leaps and bounds in recent years, thanks to two new and major understandings. One is that human waste disposal is not just about plumbing, but about psychology. The toilet is a fascinating place for behavioral psychologists and anthropologists, for a start ? and this book, by two United States academics, gives some interesting academic viewpoints about toilet behavior ? because every culture in history has had interesting and often illogical, but always complex codes about hygiene and pollution. There are ancient Buddhist texts detailing exactly how you should behave in a latrine; the Bible, in Deuteronomy 23, gives clear instructions that you should always defecate away from habitation. Hindus believe cow dung is holy but human waste is filthy, a belief system that explains how I could watch a rural woman dipping her hand into a bucket of green cow goo and spreading it on a wall (to disinfect), five minutes before she expressed horror at the thought of having a latrine anywhere near her house. In short, humans are complicated, and it is now known that there is not one perfect solution to how to dispose of human waste, but hundreds. Flexibility is key. So a biogas digester that may be appropriate in China (a fecalphiliac culture where human waste has long been seen as a resource, not a waste) would not necessarily go down well in rural India. It is also now acknowledged that the flush toilet, sewer and wastewater treatment plant paradigm, long seen as the apex of sanitation, is simply not appropriate in many situations. It is of no use, for example, in a country with water stress problems. It is of no use if there is no skill-base to maintain it. Megacities and slums are a particular headache. There are a billion slum dwellers, and Africa?s slum populations, for example, are growing twice as fast as any other. What do you do to give them sanitation when they have no land rights, so authorities do not want to give them official water supplies or sewer lines, and when there is very little land for latrine-building? Sadly, the solution is generally open defecation, but there are nonetheless plenty of people working on alleviating that (you do not want open defecation when human feces can carry 50 communicable diseases, and when diarrhea, 90 percent of which is caused by food and water contaminated by excrement, kills more children than H.I.V./AIDS or malaria). What I find fascinating about the field of sanitation is that although the statistics are still awful ? 90 percent of sewage in the developing world still discharged into the oceans; diarrhea kills more children under 5 than H.I.V./AIDS or malaria ? there is a lot of innovation and invention. Composting toilets; pour-flush dual-pit latrines; Japanese robo-toilets; arbor loos; community slum toilet blocks. So the answer to your question is that the answer is still being worked on. All schoolchildren should be taken to see both water treatment and garbage/recycling facilities. They should be taught young that nothing disappears ? it all has to be dealt with somehow. ? Posted by LB That does happen, at least in the United Kingdom. I have attended ?sewage school,? a daylong introduction to wastewater treatment financed by one water utility, and it was eye-opening. The local schoolchildren who attended were fascinated, and it is a great age to grab their attention, as they are young enough to retain their fascination with feces and not to have had it drummed into them, as we all do, that it is rude or uncouth to discuss human waste (a state of affairs which has in fact only existed for 300 years or so; before that human defecation was so tolerated, monarchs would defecate in public and eat in private). So children are a great target audience. The sewage school I attended encouraged them to make ?sewage soup,? where they volunteered to add to a tank of water anything that might end up in a sewer. Shampoo, toothpaste, breakfast cereal milk, car shampoo, grit and oil from the road. As far as I can tell, the New York City Department of Environmental Protection does not have any regular school visit program, so the best way to get a sense of what their estimable staffs do to keep the city?s wastewater system flowing is to watch out for heats of the Wastewater Operator?s? Challenge, also known as the Sewer Olympics. It?s a rare opportunity for New York?s wastewater workers to show off their skill. After all, they do not even have a nickname ? they are not New York?s finest, or bravest ? even though without them, and without a wastewater infrastructure, there is no doubt that the city would be unable to function. Should tissues (not toilet paper) ? I?m talking about facial tissues put to normal use ? be put in the trash or flushed down the toilet? Which is better for the environment? ? Posted by LH The sewer workers and wastewater treatment people I have hung out with have never complained about facial tissues. That said, if they are treated with anything, it is not a good idea to add chemicals to the wastewater flow if you can avoid it. One did tell me, though, that he loathes triple toilet tissue, because it does not disintegrate as quickly. But what they really do not like is fat. I visited sewers in London and New York City, and both times, workers told me how much they loathe having to deal with FOG (fat, oils and grease). In one stairwell in London, the path was blocked by great big disgusting blocks of congealed fat. It costs a fortune to remove, and flushers ? sewer workers ? hate it much more than they hate feces, as fat gets into their pores even after they shower. Ever since that sewer visit, I have been careful not to pour any oil down the sink. I wipe frying pans with tissue and put it in the garbage, or I save the oil and then pour it on earth somewhere. I will not forget those gray blocks of fat in a hurry. Of course, with toilet tissue there is the enormous issue of excess paper use, not to mention the fact that wiping the dirtiest part of your body with dry paper makes no sense whatsoever. But I will get to that in the next set of questions. Rose, your book was as beautiful as your name, and covered what may be the most important public health topic in the world. I hope Part II is coming out soon, and that you will be bolder in making recommendations! I want to ask about ?gray water? ? using water from showers, dish and clothes washers and sinks to water plants in the yards. When the water is used to grow trees, they help cool our houses and reduce energy use as well. Unfortunately, they are illegal! Here in California, a study by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power found that we could save half our residential water use with no public health risks. Today, gray water is basically illegal. A law currently under debate in the State Legislature may allow limited systems, with a complicated permit process. When will we shift and actually require us all to put these systems in place? ? Posted by ?lan Thank you for your kind words about both my book and my name. Gray water is, of course, household water from sinks, baths and showers, but not toilets (toilet wastewater is known as ?black water?). The gray-water issue is another instance of regulation and legislation being somewhat behind the times. Recycling of gray water is widely practiced elsewhere in the world, e.g., Germany and Sweden. It is also done in Australia, where people are keenly aware of water conservation issues. You do need to have proper filters to remove suds and parabens, etc., that will be in the water from cleaning products, but there are products, system and knowledge available. It is a great shame that the legislative framework in the United States has not gotten around to addressing gray-water use yet, when as you and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power point out, it could have a powerful water-conservation impact. I know that people wanting to install urine-diversion toilets, for example (where urine and feces are kept separate, and urine can be used for recycling), face similar problems. Often it is not that the practice is illegal, but it is simply not addressed in legislation. Perhaps it will only be a matter of time before environmental pressures bring about a cultural shift here as well. Public pressure on legislators can only help. Can you settle a bit of tension that has cropped up in another post of the CityRoom forum? Can we eat the oysters they are seeding in Jamaica Bay, or would we be better off just enjoying the cleaner water? ? Posted by Phishaw From what I have read of the oyster seeding, they are being used to filter and clean the water. People are often surprised that natural organisms can be used to clean wastewater, but it happens all day every day at most wastewater treatment plants, where bacteria are used to clean the organic material in sewage. Plants can do it, too; ?wastewater stabilization ponds? are a great alternative to energy-consuming, expensive huge wastewater treatment plants. They work by using sunlight, water flow and plants to clean. Prince Charles has a reed bed ? a form of waste stabilization pond ? at Highgrove House, and the Australian city of Melbourne treats half of its sewage in lagoons at Werribee. New York?s waters are certainly cleaner than they used to be, but as I said earlier in the post about combined sewer overflows, or CSOs, it only takes a tiny bit of rain ? sometimes only a 20th of an inch ? for the sewer system to be overloaded and for raw sewage to be discharged into the bay. The nongovernmental organization Riverkeeper estimates that ?more than 27 billion gallons of raw sewage and polluted storm water discharge out of 460 combined sewage overflows (?CSOs?) into New York Harbor alone each year.? The system as a whole is flawed, and until we figure out how to stop sewage overflows (which I think will happen only when we begin to seriously question the whole paradigm of waterborne waste treatment), I would choose something else for supper, while being grateful to the oysters for their natural filtration abilities. http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/answers-about-human-waste-and-sanitation-part-2/ /////////////////////////////////// Part III http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/14/answers-about-human-waste-and-sanitation-part-3/ August 14, 2009, 1:01 pm Answers About Human Waste and Sanitation, Part 3 By The New York Times Taking Questions Ask About Human Waste Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters,? responds to readers. Following is the third and final set of answers from Rose George, the author of ?The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and Why It Matters.? Seems that these ?low flow? toilets are for the birds. They require multiple flushes and clog at the drop of a hat. ? Posted by el barto I?ve already responded to criticism of low-flow toilets, but I wanted to use this question to address the great wet-dry debate. It may seem tangential, but if, as I suspect, those low-flow toilets are being required to treat lots of sheets of toilet tissue ? the average American is supposed to use 57 sheets a day ? then it?s perhaps not that tangential after all. The unquestioning acceptance of toilet tissue as a cleansing method ? the toilet tissue industry is worth billions ? is a source of astonishment to me. Using dry paper to clean your backside makes as much hygienic sense as wiping yourself with a towel and imagining you?ve had a shower. We use water to wash our cars but not the dirtiest part of our bodies. It?s odd. I like to tell the tale of the valiant Dr. J. A. Cameron, who in 1964 examined the underpants of 940 men of Oxfordshire, England, to see how clean their anal hygiene was. I won?t go into detail here (there?s more in my book), except to say that Dr. Cameron expressed his bewilderment at how ?a high proportion of the population are prepared to cry aloud about footling matters of uncleanliness such as a tomato sauce stain on a restaurant tablecloth, whilst they luxuriate on a plush seat in their fecally stained pants.? Of course, millions of Americans, particularly those from water-using cultures (Hindus and Muslims, for a start) do use water to wash themselves, despite the difficulties. There was a lovely art show in New York in 2005 named ?Lota Stories,? in which Americans recorded their experiences of using a lota (a cup of water) in their toilet habits. Possible subterfuge tactics include keeping a plant in the bathroom to have an excuse for a watering can by the toilet; carrying a soda bottle of water into a stall will look less obvious than a cup. I firmly believe that there is a huge amount of frustration with toilet tissue as the sole method of cleansing; when I did a Q&A online, there were 90 comments left, and about 87 were to do with people?s solutions to the inadequacy of toilet tissue (aloe vera and biodegradable wet-wipes were a couple of solutions). My preference? A mixture of water and paper. Just wanted to chime in to say this is a great book ? smart, fun to read, highly informed. I?ve never been more motivated to make humanure. ? Posted by LB Several years ago, we installed a Canadian-made self-contained composting toilet system for our upstate home, and have used the resulting fertilizer to grow numerous vegetables. We?re certainly not back-to-the-earth fanatics, but merely everyday people concerned about the future of the world. Our toilet system faced incredible resistance from the community. Now townspeople are opposing wind generators, solar panels and even small hydro-generators on private streams. Why is there so much resistance to ecologically rational steps? ? Posted by Robert Garrett Humanure, a word popularized in this great book by Joseph Jenkins, is composted human waste done at a household level. There are all sorts of theories about how best to compost feces, and whether it?s better to separate urine (because solids would dry more quickly, and the liquid urine contains 80 percent of nutrients in excreta, so it is an easily accessible fertilizer source), or to stir or not to stir, or how long the compost should be left (it seems that six months is a good minimum). In the United States, humanure is still seen as slightly kooky ? and is only viable if you have land on which to use the fertilizer, ruling out many city dwellers - but dry toilets (which could compost but probably don?t) are standard in many national parks and mountain areas. Composting toilets are also extremely common in, for example, Scandinavia. I was reading Stieg Larsson?s ?The Girl Who Played With Fire? recently, and was struck ? and pleased ? by how, when the heroine went to a summer cabin, the composting toilet was mentioned totally casually. No big deal. I do believe that the resistance to ?ecologically rational steps,? as you rightly call them, will abate. A Norwegian professor told me about a friend of his who had small children. They?d grown up with a dry toilet, then started at kindergarten, where there was a regular flush toilet. They were horrified, he said, because they could see human waste ??oating in the water, and they were used to a black hole. You can get used to anything.? It?s only been 200 years, after all, since it was perfectly acceptable for upstanding men to talk publicly of sewage farms and to be happy to be known as ?sewage doctors.? Pasadena?s sewage farm used to produce wonderful walnuts; most of Paris?s restaurants got their vegetables from Gennevilliers sewage farm near the city. If we can only get rid of the conversational taboo of talking about human waste, then we will make much better progress towards a more sustainable method of human waste disposal. We are fools to be flushing away our own excretions with drinking-quality water. It?s a huge waste of water. It?s a huge waste of a resource we should be using to grow food. It?s been done in Asia for ages. If they can do it, why can?t we? Are we that dumb? (? Well, maybe we are). ? Posted by Stephen We do. Sludge/biosolids is used to grow food (see my first set of answers). And it has always been used in Europe and America. A few hundred years ago, ?gong-fermors? (a mangling of ?gunge-farmers?) would take the contents of cesspools to farms from big cities. But as the cities grew, and the farms got farther away, it became cost-ineffective. Women of my grandmother?s generation in northern England still remember the men who would collect urine from their privies, which was then used in tanning or the textile industry. And though I admire the fact that Asians see human excreta as a rich resource, not waste (it?s used a lot in pisciculture, for example), I?m somewhat skeptical about the habit of using raw human waste on the fields (a practice that is easy to smell in some parts of rural China), because uncomposted human feces can carry diseases and extremely resilisient worm eggs. Composting or digesting is better. But you?re right that human waste ? as you can tell by the name ? is severely underexploited as a resource. Perhaps a name change would help? From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 18 14:12:45 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 14:12:45 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> EPA Flip-Flop Allows Lead-Hiding Technique for Federal Water Compliance Tests Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: What water collection protocol is used in your municipality. Find out...email it in. .............................. http://www.afhh.org/res/res_alert_archives_apr09.htm EPA Flip-Flop Allows Lead-Hiding Technique for Federal Water Compliance Tests In a policy move with disturbing national ramifications, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has officially approved a DC Water and Sewer Authority?s (WASA) lead in water testing protocol known as ?pre-flushing? that the federal agency originally said ?goes against the intent? of federal lead water testing rules and artificially reduces lead measurements at the tap. The EPA quietly authorized this protocol without informing lead poisoning prevention advocates or the public of its action until March 2009, six months after acting. The technique is also being used by other large city utilities, including those in Chicago and Philadelphia, calling into question the soundness of lead in drinking water data in many jurisdictions. EPA?s formal approval of pre-flushing in DC has alarming national implications because it may spark its even wider use. Under the federal lead in water testing law known as the Lead and Copper Rule, or LCR, local utilities must test for lead at consumers? taps to ensure that water being consumed is safe. Corrosion in the distribution system and in the home can result in elevated lead levels, so the LCR requires utilities to collect samples after water has been standing for at least six hours, in order to measure ?worst case? lead levels people find when they first turn on the tap in the morning or return home from work. Most jurisdictions leave sample bottles and instructions at selected high-risk homes, and ask residents to fill them when they first get up in the morning. Importantly, samples are supposed to be collected under normal water use conditions, and a 2004 memo regarding proper LCR samples from EPA?s acting assistant administrator said, ?There is no outer limit on standing time.? In other words, residents are allowed to let the water stand for any duration over 6 hours prior to sampling that happens to occur through normal use, which is important because longer stagnation times, up to a point, can result in higher lead in water levels. Pre-flushing involves running the water at the tap where the sample is to be taken on the eve of compliance sampling, prior to starting stagnation ? something most people simply don?t do normally. Dr. Marc Edwards, Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and an expert on drinking water safety, has shown that pre-flushing for between two and 10 minutes sharply reduces water lead levels captured the next morning. In fact, a representative of EPA?s Office of Water acknowledged at an October 2008 public meeting that pre-flushing artificially hides lead in water by purging lead rust and solder particles that might otherwise flow from the tap the next time it?s opened. Dr. Edwards says that pre-flushing also can reduce the amount of dissolved lead in the sample by putting an artificial cap on standing time. Last summer, DC advocates discovered that since 2005 DC WASA, had been instructing LCR testers to let the water run at maximum flow for ten minutes the night before collecting the sample. When advocates called this to the attention of EPA last August and asked the agency to ban the practice, the initial response was encouraging. Cynthia Dougherty, director of EPA?s Office of Water, wrote on September 12 that pre-flushing ?goes against the intent of the [LCR?s] monitoring protocol, since it changes the normal water use of the homeowners in the sample.? But a few days later, EPA formally and quietly approved a two-minute pre-flush for DC WASA. In the meantime, DC WASA was falsely assuring advocates that they were no longer seeking EPA permission to continue a pre-flush of any duration. DC WASA switched from a 10-minute to a two-minute pre-flush instruction for LCR compliance sampling immediately after receiving EPA?s approval letter, and is using it currently for its January-June 2009 tests. Dr. Edwards? research indicates that a two-minute pre-flush hides nearly as much lead as a 10-minute pre-flush. Dougherty justified contradicting her earlier assessment of the pre-flush as not constituting normal water use with a contorted and illogical explanation: A two-minute pre-flush recommendation on the eve of LCR sample collection is justifiable as ?normal use? because DC WASA allegedly instructs all its customers to flush their taps for two minutes just before consuming tap water. But, WASA has not issued a general flushing recommendation to avoid lead for several years, and in fact has vigorously proclaimed the absolute safety of DC drinking water since 2005. And, even if a utility did regularly remind all of its customers to flush their taps before consumption, there is a vast difference between such general advice that?s usually ignored and a specific written reminder written on an LCR sampling instruction form that?s likely to be followed by nearly every resident taking a compliance sample. Also flushing lines prior to beginning stagnation, at least 6 hours before sampling, and flushing just before running water for consumption are not in the least equivalent. DC WASA has had a troubled history regarding lead in drinking water, especially since 2001 when lead levels skyrocketed after a water disinfection chemical was changed. Unknown to the public until January 2004, lead levels remained high, and DC WASA failed to meet the LCR?s lead standard, until an anti-corrosion chemical began to be added to the water. DC WASA?s use of the pre-flush starting in early 2005, the year that DC WASA supposedly returned to meeting the LCR?s lead standard, raises the possibility that their LCR test results ? and the accompanying assurances about the safety of DC water ? have been a deception. The Alliance and other advocates are demanding that EPA put a stop to pre-flushing and other techniques that hide lead in LCR samples and undermine the clear intent of the LCR. We are also working with members of Congress to increase awareness of the problem and reform the LCR. Because EPA does not collect information on the specific protocols used for LCR compliance, it?s impossible to know how many other utilities are gaming the system. Local advocates are encouraged to check their utility?s LCR sample collection protocol for anything that requires a deviation from how water is normally used. Please email Alliance Staff member Ralph Scott what you find. rscott at afhh.org From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 18 11:50:42 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:50:42 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> City of Vancouver's big new toilet? In-Reply-To: <487202.26612.qm@web80606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <487202.26612.qm@web80606.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Nice photo - http://www.theprovince.com/Burns+City+Vancouver+toilet/1904776/story.html Burns Bog: City of Vancouver's big new toilet? By Brian Lewis, The Province August 18, 2009 The City of Vancouver has asked the Ministry of Environment to consider using Burns Bog landfill as a dumping ground for sludge from its Iona waste treatment plant. Photograph by: Gerry Kahrmann file, The Province Last February I wrote that locating the Vancouver landfill in Delta?s Burns Bog made as much sense as having an outhouse in an urban backyard. At the time I had no idea the statement may have been clairvoyant. Now we see where the City of Vancouver, which has operated the 225-hectare facility since the mid-1960s, wants to use it as an outhouse of sorts. It proposes to deposit 85,000 cubic metres, or 8,500 dump-truck loads, of sewage sludge (they call it ?biosolids?) from the Iona treatment plant onto the landfill?s 12-hectare Phase One closure site. Vancouver has applied in writing to the Ministry of Environment for an amendment of its landfill operational certificate so the sludge from Iona can be used. It said shortages of regular subsoil approved under the original certificate led to its application to use the sludge. The July 20 letter also asked for ?a favourable response? from the ministry as quickly as possible because the project?s completion date of Oct. 15, 2009, is closing fast. Unfortunately, this was the first either senior Delta staff, the municipality?s councillors or taxpayers had heard about the plan to include the use of biosolids. The problem with it is the landfill?s proximity to highly sensitive areas in Burns Bog. I recently toured the site and saw how city engineers are spending a lot of time and money to make sure old garbage in the landfill?s $15-million Phase One closure project won?t leach contaminants into the surrounding bog, Delta?s irrigation system, its nearby farmland and, finally, into Georgia Strait. But the sludge will be placed above a protective plastic membrane as part of a top layer of the site?s reclamation where trees, grasses, etc., will be planted. And despite elaborate ditching, there?s a significant risk that leaching from Iona?s sewage will alter the bog?s delicate chemical balance and pollute Delta?s farm irrigation systems. ?This exposes the ignorance of some politicians to the ecology of Burns Bog,? says Eliza Olson, head of the Burns Bog Conservation Society. ?By their nature, bogs are nutrient-poor but they have an incredible ability to absorb and store carbon,? she says. Olson explains that nutrients from the sewage sludge will greatly reduce the bog?s carbon-absorbing ability by changing its chemistry and plant makeup. Acting Delta mayor Scott Hamilton is concerned that the City of Vancouver will use the sewage sludge in subsequent section closures at the landfill. ?We?ll definitely seek a court injunction if the ministry approves this application,? he warns. ?If this landfill was within the City of Vancouver?s limits, there would be a real public uproar over this proposal,? adds Delta chief administration officer George Harvie. ?We?re having our lawyers check our legal standing on the operational agreement.? However, now that Delta has fired off an angry letter to the environment ministry outlining its strong objections, Vancouver may be backtracking. ?Because of Delta?s opposition, we won?t go ahead with the biosolids plan until we?ve talked to them about their concerns and have their support,? Vancouver City engineer Doreann Mayhew told me Monday afternoon. E-mail: blewis at theprovince.com From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 19 15:45:06 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:45:06 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sewage Sludge - spreading the H1N1 swine flu pandemic to wildlife - increased resistance Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: A notice has gone out from Homeland Security to Water and Wastewater departments. They figure staff absenteeism from H1N1 may be as much as 40%. Viruses are not destroyed in the sewage treatment process, so sick members of the population will be excreting H1N1 into the sewer system and into the sludge that is spread in the countryside. In the countryside wild life - like migratory birds, foxes, skunks, even family pets will become carriers of virus. The passage through the sewage treatment plant - and the anaerobic digesters is also likely to allow for the spread of the H1N1 DNA to otherwise and may also bring about Tamiflu resistance. Memo to Water and Wastewater Facilities: http://wwn-online.com/Articles/2009/08/14/Utilities-Should-Prepare-for-H1N1-Impacts-on-Staff.aspx?p=1 CDC and other epidemiologists and public health official needs to look at the threat that H1N1 will be introduced into the environment and become a zoonotic disease passed between people and wildlife reservoirs - with increasing resistance to tamiflu (since the tamiflu will also be present in the sewage treatment process and the sludge). ........................ Report from Homeland Security: http://wwn-online.com/~/media/ENV/eponline/Whitepapers/2009/07/flupandemicannex.ashx Pandemic Influenza Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Guide for critical infrastructure and key resources Page 5 A severe influenza pandemic may generate extended absences for essential workers that might affect you and your supply chain. During an influenza pandemic the actual level of workforce absenteeism could approach 40 percent. To complicate matters, the disease will strike randomly among employees from operation managers to front-line workers as well as employee families. Implementing rigorous personal hygiene and social distancing strategies along with the strategic use of PPE in the workplace may alleviate potential worker-related crises. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 19 15:47:39 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:47:39 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Link between arsenic exposure and flu susceptibility Message-ID: Podcast Examines Link Between Arsenic Exposure And Flu Susceptibility http://www.medilexicon.com/med... In the latest installment of The Researcher's Perspective, the new podcast series by Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), Dr. Josh Hamilton discusses the potential implications of his recent mouse study on arsenic exposure and immune response to influenza A/H1N1. Hamilton and his colleagues found that mice exposed to 100 parts per billion (ppb) arsenic in drinking water had a significantly compromised innate immune response to infection with a mouse-adapted subtype of H1N1 influenza. When this first line of immune defense was suppressed by arsenic, mice infected with H1N1 became severely ill. In comparison, flu symptoms in mice that were not exposed to arsenic were relatively mild, even though the animals were infected with the same H1N1 strain. In the new podcast Hamilton explains, "With so many people potentially exposed to arsenic in drinking water, the implications for increased mortality from influenza viral infections and bacterial infections could be profound." Contamination of drinking water by natural geological sources of arsenic is the primary route of exposure to this element. Hundreds of millions of people worldwide, including up to 25 million Americans, drink well water containing levels of arsenic above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's limit of 10 ppb. "I would urge anyone who's on a private well supply to have their water tested," Hamilton said. "People may not realize that only public water supplies are regulated by the state and federal government, and that private, unregulated wells are untested [on a routine basis] unless the homeowner chooses to do that." The Researcher's Perspective provides a behind-the-scenes look at what researchers are studying and the human health implications of their research. New podcasts are posted at www.ehponline.org and on iTunes. Updates on new podcasts are available through EHP's RSS and Twitter feeds. Other podcasts currently available include "Do PCBs Contribute to Childhood Leukemia?" with Dr. Mary H. Ward, "Public Health for the 21st Century" with Dr. Kenneth Olden and "Long-Term Effects of Bisphenol A Exposure" with Retha Newbold. EHP is published by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. EHP is an Open Access journal. Brogan & Partners Convergence Marketing handles marketing and public relations for the publication and is responsible for creation and distribution of this press release. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 20 16:50:37 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 16:50:37 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Comment on proposed sludge compost facility Hinkley California Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: Read the draft Environmental Impact Report: It still isn't clear where the water would come from to wet the piles, to keep down the dust, to wash the gooey sludge off the departing trucks, to provide sanitation for the workers and drivers, and wet the finished compost stored on site to keep it from blowing offsite. The proposed site is smack in the middle of what is supposed to be Desert Tortoise restoration lands...where the endangered Desert Tortoise is supposed to breed and recreate themselves back into sustainable numbers. However, the bacteria blowing off the sludge will increase the great cause of death among Desert Tortoise - mycoplasma pneumonia. see: Infectious diseases and pathology of reptiles By Elliott R. Jacobson Nursery Products states again in this supplemental Environmental Impact Report that they do not intend to compost according to the windrow compost requirements. They do not intend to always turn the piles of sludge 5 times - as required by the state and federal sludge compost regulations. ............................................... http://www.desertdispatch.com/opinion/0px-6729-nursery-sludge.html Desert Dispatch, Barstow California Nursery Products' Sludge Facility August 20, 2009 Nursery Products LLC is still trying to get their proposed compost/sludge facility west of Hinkley okayed through the county and Helphinkley is still fighting them. But Helphinkley.org can?t do this alone. The residents of Barstow, Daggett, Yermo, Newberry Springs, Helendale, and non-member Helphinkley Hinkley residents need to help. Do you really want this facility in your backyard? This facility will detrimentally impact our air, water, health, harm the habitat of wildlife, cause traffic problems on State Hwy. 58, and possibly be a fire hazard. You must help! The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) is out now. The judge here in Barstow required that Nursery Products go back and redo several points in the original EIR. These points were supposed to cover the issues of a water source for this facility and the economic feasibility of enclosing this facility. Nursery Products says there is enough water (from a well) ? 1,000 gallons/day! They will have to drill a well and this water will be coming from our water supply to wet down compost piles to produce a compost product that Nursery Products says they have a market for (do we actually know this as fact?). On the issue of the feasibility of enclosing this facility to better protect the environment and our health Nursery Products says it is not economically feasible to cover this large facility. Why does it have to be so large? Who?s sludge/green waste are they using in their composting? Not ours! The sludge/green waste will be trucked in from LA and other areas. You have until September 13 to comment on the SEIR. To read the SEIR go to the county website ? www.co.san-bernardino.ca.us/landuseservices/Public%20Notices/EIRs/Nursery%20Products%207-09/1-Draft%20SEIR%20Nursery%20Products%20Hawes%20Composting%20Facility.pdf or read the copy at the Barstow Branch Library or the Hinkley Senior Center. Please send your comments and/or questions to Carrie Hyke, Principal Planner, Advance Planning Division, 385 N. Arrowhead Ave., First Floor, San Bernardino, California 92415-0182 Joan Bird Hinkley From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 24 14:39:25 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:39:25 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> BBC - MP calls for summit on sewage and paper sludge stink on UK island Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: This story illustrates the reality - sludge stink means no tourism...a blow to rural tourist industries. It also means lowered property values in the countryside and therefore a loss of tax revenue to rural municipalities. ............................................................ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/8215830.stm MP calls summit over sludge stink Sewage and paper sludge spreading has been blamed for the stench A summit has been called to find a solution to a "pungent and acrid" stench which has been upsetting residents on the Isle of Sheppey. The smell, which is coming from fields in the Leysdown area, has prompted more than 100 complaints to Swale council. There have been concerns it is putting people off visiting the island. Sittingbourne and Sheppey MP Derek Wyatt has organised a meeting between the Environment Agency, Swale Council and local farmers' representatives. Swale Borough Council said the smell was first caused by lime-stabilised sludge but when that had abated the stench was caused by paper sludge. It is clear to anyone with a nose that this activity is causing a nuisance Derek Wyatt MP It said the spreading was a recognised agricultural practice and the smell should subside soon. Mr Wyatt said farmers were required to obtain permits from the Environment Agency to spread paper sludge on the condition that it does not cause an odour nuisance. He added: "I think we now need to say 'enough is enough'. "If farmers can't stick to the conditions of their licence, then those licences should be taken away." Mr Wyatt said: "It is clear to anyone with a nose that this activity is causing a nuisance. It's a nuisance to residents, it's a nuisance to tourists, and it's a nuisance to the businesses who rely on those tourists coming back. "This summit gives us a chance to reach an agreement on what is acceptable, as well as spelling out what will happen if the agreement is broken." The meeting is expected to take place within the next two weeks. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 24 14:53:16 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 14:53:16 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sewage plants use more electric than hospitals - biogas digestion energy cheaper option Message-ID: 24/8/2009 >From large sewage plants to small http://www.tcetoday.com/tcetoday/NewsDetail.aspx?nid=12039 High-rate digestion process cuts time and cost by Claudia Flavell-While Only 10% of Germany's water treatment plants have digestion tanks A NEW high-rate digestion process with microfiltration should make digestion tanks in water treatment affordable for small- and medium sized units, Germany?s Fraunhofer Institute says. At present, most small and medium-sized sewage plants baulk at the cost of installing a digestion tank to remove the accumulated sludge and turn it into biogas, even though the technology is state-of-the-art in large sewage plants. Case in point: only 1156 of Germany?s 10,000-plus sewage plants have a digestion tank, Fraunhofer Institute says. Instead, most these plants stabilise sludge in activation basins with the help of oxygen. ?Activation basins require a lot of electricity. At the same time, enormous energy potential is lost, since no biogas is produced,? says Brigitte Kempter-Regel of the Fraunhofer Institute for Interfacial Engineering and Biotechnology IGB in Stuttgart. ?A sewage plant eats up more electricity in the municipalities than their hospitals do.? Kempter-Regel carried out a cost-benefit-study which, she says, shows that investing in a digestion tank is money well spent. ?Based on a sewage plant for 28,000 inhabitants, we calculate that the plant can reduce its annual waste management costs from ?225,000 ($322,000) by as much as ?170,000 if sludge is decayed in a high-rate digestion unit with microfiltration, as opposed to treating it aerobically,? she says. Together with her colleagues at IGB, Kempter-Regel developed a novel, ultra-fast digestion process, in which sludge only remains in the tower for five to seven days, rather than the usual 30 to 50 days, sludge only remains in the tower for five to seven days. Around 60% of the organic matter is converted into biogas ? the spoil is approximately a third more than in the traditional digestion process. The biogas obtained can be used to operate the plant, which, in the case study, would cut energy costs by at least ?70,000/y. In addition, high-rate digestion produces less residual sludge needing disposal, saving the operator another ?100,000/y, says Kempter-Regel. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Mon Aug 24 15:04:25 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 15:04:25 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Physician- and others- respond to Ontario's proposed sludge changes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ***** Hon John Gerretsen, Minister of the Environment, Constituency Office, Suite 2 303 Bagot Street, The LaSalle Mews Kingston, Ontario K7K 5W7 August 10, 2009 Re: EBR # 010-6515: A Regulatory Framework for the Management of Non-Agricultural Source Materials and Regulatory Amendments Concerning Milking Centre Washwater and Anaerobic Digestion Dear Hon John Gerretsen, I am currently a Palliative Care Physician Consultant at University Hospital, London Health Science Centre. Daily I watch people die of cancer and other illnesses that we know are preventable. We know that environmental toxins and chemical body burden contribute to these devastating diseases. I am acutely aware of how much more vigilant we need to be at lessening our exposure to toxins whenever possible if we are going to have any impact on reducing the incidence of cancer. The restriction of cosmetic pesticides is one important and commendable small step but there is so much more that we need to do. Working in a tertiary care hospital I am also aware of the dangers of increasing antibiotic resistant organisms and the prevalence of ?Super-bugs?, both inside and outside of hospitals. We are becoming more aware that these problems are related to antibiotics that are inadvertently in our environment such as antibiotics and antibiotic soap in sewage increasing the development of antibiotic resistant organisms. I am extremely concerned that the use of sewage and paper sludge, politely referred to as ?Biosolids? is already contributing to these horrifying problems. There is potential for the impact to be even more devastating if this practice continues, or worse, expands. For these reasons I find the proposed changes in Waste Regulation 347 and in the Nutrient Management Act to remove the Certificate of Approval permits for sewage sludges and paper sludges and other wastes on farm land to be a dangerous move in the wrong direction. Sludges are wastes and they need to be managed as waste by the Ministry of the Environment due to their dangerous and toxic compounds, the industrial and pathogenic components, and the risk they pose to the food chain, wild life, livestock, farm soil, ground water, surface water and ultimately human health. Your Ministry, the Ministry of the Environment has the role and responsibility to develop waste policies to protect the public from harmful compounds. This is not the role of the Ministry of Agriculture. The Ministry of the Environment should have the technical staff to understand water quality protection, regulate the newly emerging contaminant compounds that are found in sludge, and to enforce waste regulations. For over 30 years land application of sludges have been managed by the Ministry of Environment and governed by The Environmental Protection Act, and Certificates of Approval. I served as the acting Medical Officer of Health for Elgin St. Thomas for ten years and I am very aware of limitation within the Ministry of the Environment. However the resources and the responsibility to manage industrial wastes, including sewage and paper sludge compounds, lie with the Ministry of the Environment and should remain there. While sludges may have some plant nutrients, to shift their management over to the Nutrient Management Act which focuses solely on nutrient issues, is to unreservedly mischaracterize and misrepresent industrial and municipal sludges. Sludges can contain toxic quantities of PCBs, lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium and other carcinogenic contaminants as well as harmful pathogens. These toxins must not be ignored. The apparent rationale provided for the move to the NMA to manage sludges (NASM) is to decrease regulatory duplication. While regulating the possible nutrient aspect of sludge may be convenient, failing to regulate the harmful aspects has the potential to have devastating consequences for human health and possibly render farmland useless. The health and economic penalty for this governmental miscalculation could be astronomical. The Canadian Infectious Disease Society has long called for a moratorium on sludge spreading until the risks to public health and the integrity of food are thoroughly evaluated. I would like to echo this stance. We cannot afford to be so careless with our farmland, environment and human health. Convenience and profit must not be this government?s priorities. The Province has enacted the Green Energy Act which promotes biomass for energy. Sludges, both paper and sewage sludge, can be used to create green renewable energy. This would have better emissions than the coal fired plants, and a better environmental footprint. There is no need or excuse to continue to pollute Ontario?s food chain with industrial wastes and municipal sewage sludges. At a time when we should be enhancing our environmental protection, farmland and food safety for the wellbeing of our citizens, I beg you and your government to reconsider the dangerous direction that you are heading. Keep Biosolids under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Environment requiring Certificates of Approval. While we are learning more about the health risks of sludges we must use the Precautionary Principle. It is time that we embark on a full investigation of the health, agricultural, water quality, food safety, and pathogen issues associated with sludge use on farmland. We cannot justify further delay. We must begin this immediately. The life you save may be that of your own or your loved one. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. Sincerely, Dr. Sharon Baker ***** From: Chris Dancey [mailto:dancey at amtelecom.net] Sent: August 13, 2009 10:17 AM To: John Gerretsen; Toby Barrett; Peter Tabuns Subject: Sewage Sludge on Farm Fields Attn: Hon John Gerretsen, Hon Toby Barrett, Hon Peter Tabuns, I cannot emphasize enough my concerns related to the spreading of sewage sludge on farmland. Over the past 10 years, I have lost faith in the Ministry of the Environment to PROTECT the environment, so I want to ensure that the politicians who will be debating the proposed changes to the regulations covered by EBR #010-6515 are aware that there is scientific research to support my concerns. Below you will find my EBR submission that explains some of my concerns. Since the MoE, OMAFRA and WEAO actively promote the spreading of sewage sludge on farmland, they are not interested in knowing about the negative impacts. Several times during the July 13 presentation that is mentioned in my letter, MoE and OMAFRA staff stated that NO scientific studies exist that show there are risks to environmental, human or animal health due to the spreading of sewage. According to them the spreading of sewage sludge is 100% safe if the levels of 11 heavy metals are low enough. How is it that I knew about Case for Caution Revisited: Health and Environmental Impacts of Application of Sewage Sludges to Agricultural Land, but they did not? See link below within my letter. Please be well informed on the issues related to the proposed changes that will be brought forward this fall. I have focused on the issues related to sewage sludge, but there are many other concerns. Replies will be appreciated. Chris Dancey 51213 Wooleyville Line RR#1, Aylmer, On N5H 2R1 ............... Michelle Whitbread Senior Policy Analyst Ministry of the Environment Integrated Environmental Policy Division Waste Management Policy Branch 135 St Clair Avenue West Floor 7 Toronto Ontario M4V 1P5 July 27, 2009 EBR number 010-6515: A Regulatory Framework for the Management of Non-Agricultural Source Materials and Regulatory Amendments Concerning Milking Centre Washwater and Anaerobic Digestion Dear Ms. Whitbread, I believe Category 3 NASM should NOT be used on farmland that grows food for human or animal consumption. I am particularly concerned about the use of sewage sludge on farmland. The negative impacts can affect: 1) the environment (land, water, air, vegetation and animals); 2) farmers; 3) neighbors of farmers that spread Category 3 NASM; and 4) consumers of food. I believe the risks far outweigh any nutrient benefit. 1) Environment: For up-to-date research, please read as part of my submission Case for Caution Revisited: Health and Environmental Impacts of Application of Sewage Sludges to Agricultural Land http://cwmi.css.cornell.edu/case.pdf by Ellen Z. Harrison, retired Director, and Murray McBride, Director, Cornell Waste Management Institute, Dept. of Crop and Soil Sciences, Rice Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. September 2008 (updated March 2009). Scientific research has demonstrated that sewage sludge can have severe long term negative impacts on the environment and, therefore, it should be kept away from farmland that is used for food production. 2) Farmers: Farmland is often the retirement fund for a farmer. If the value drops due to contamination from Category 3 NASM, trusting farmers will have lost what they have worked hard to gain and hold. At the July 13 meeting I asked, ?If in the future we learn that NASM should not have been spread on farmland ? WHO will be responsible (accountable) for the toxic legacy? Does the farmer have protection?? I don?t recall an answer being given to the first question, but ?NO? was definitely the answer to the second. User beware! In a Case for Caution Revisited: Health and Environmental Impacts of Application of Sewage Sludges to Agricultural Land Harrison and McBride clearly state, ?Agricultural soils are a unique and valuable resource. Protecting agricultural soils requires anticipating and avoiding potential harms since once contaminated with persistent pollutants, the damage will remain for the foreseeable future. Once contaminated, stopping the application of pollutants such as metals and many organic chemicals that are in sewage biosolids will not correct the problem. The contamination will remain for decades or centuries. It is thus critical to prevent this essentially permanent degradation.? There must be absolutely no possibility that harm can be done by any material or process that you approve. The Precautionary Principle must prevail 3) Neighbors of farmers that spread sewage sludge and 4) Consumers: Neighbors and consumers receive NO WARNINGS related to the use of sewage sludge on farm fields. How can either avoid the risks to their health and possible contamination of their land or food from this practice? A June 2009 Q&A sheet provided on July 13 at the London NASM Framework Consultation states, ?The Ministry has been approving the land application of sewage biosolids and other NASM for over 30 years.? It has been during the past thirty years that steady increases in the prevalence and incidence of many diseases have been documented. I am not suggesting that Category 3 materials such as sewage sludge are the only cause, but rather that they contribute to the overall degradation of our environment and pose a risk to human and animal health. According to the Autism Society of Canada, Autism is now recognized as the most common neurological disorder affecting children and one of the most common developmental disabilities. Based on studies that are now several years old, approximately 1 in 165 Canadian children will have some form of autism and the number of cases is increasing worldwide. The US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) released new data from multiple communities in the U.S. in February 2007 and reported that the prevalence rate of ASD in the United States was 1 in 150. The majority of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in the areas studied had developmental concerns before age three. As part of my submission, please read the total collection of articles compiled by the Autism Society of America on the increasing awareness of links between Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and environmental toxins. http://www.autism-society.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_envirohealth_articles Dr. Martha R. Herbert?s article titled Time to Get a Grip clearly states the case for caution. http://www.autismcanada.org/pdfs/TimeToGetAGrip.pdf Also, cancer rates are increasing according to Statistics Canada and the Canadian Cancer Society states that more than 40 per cent of Canadian women and almost 45 per cent of men will develop some form of cancer during their lifetimes. Again, there is ample scientific evidence that a toxic environment is a contributing factor. I am drawing to your attention the increases in these two diseases, because it is important to be clear that suffering and death can result from bad decisions on the part of MoE and OMAFRA staff. At a time when consumer confidence in the safety of our food is so low, I believe it is essential that we keep sewage sludge away from food crops, rather than encouraging its use. When a farmer that is using sludge creates a health problem for consumers, the ill consumers endure physical suffering and possible long term health effects, and many farmers that are growing the same crop suffer economic loss, as consumers avoid the product. As long as we combine industrial, household and medical waste with nutrient rich feces, the resulting material can never be declared 100% safe for use on food growing farmland. Sludge generators and spreaders do not represent the majority and they do have their own agenda. It is interesting that the people who will be most affected by the spreading of Category 3 NASM on farmland were not an integral part of your consultation process. Protectors of our environment, such as Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, farmers and farm organizations, neighbors and consumers were largely excluded. The short notice for the meetings in July made it difficult for many to attend and the July 29 deadline makes it impossible for many to respond. I believe the submission deadline should be a minimum of 90 days, but if you are interested in comments from farmers, it must be extended to the end of 2009. The mandate to divert waste from landfill may seem like a noble goal, but if spreading sewage sludge and any other controversial Category 3 materials, such as paper sludge and paper sludge ?products? cause suffering, then there can be no justification. Farmland must be protected. We owe it to current and future generations. Yours truly, Chris Dancey Farmer and President of the Elgin County Local - National Farmers Union -- Ella Haley 519-647-0040 From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 20 17:01:19 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:01:19 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> North Carolina - public funds will not go to biosolids public forums - should go to testing sludge Message-ID: http://www.wchl1360.com/details.html?id=11492 Biosolids Controversy Continues 08/20/09 By Lynda-Marie Taurasi WCHL News Director Chair of the Board of Health Chris Harlan formally asked the commissioners to consider funding the forums with money set aside for a planned study of the impact of recycling solids, or ?sludge,? from wastewater which is then used as fertilizer. The Health Department would like permission to redirect the research study funds of 10-thousand dollars, already reserved from its operating budget in 2006, to fund two-day forums slated for the second week of October. Harlan told the commissioners that the funds allocated for the research were not sufficient and would be better served going towards forums which would cost six thousand dollars. Community activists have gathered support advocating against Biosolids being used as fertilizer and for specific policy changes at the state and local level. Opponents of the practice say the use of spreading Biosolids on farmland can cause illness, poisoning, and death. OWASA admits to participating in Biosolid recycling on farmland and has said the wastewater is treated for a period of 30-days in a biological process called ?digestion? which heats the waste to about 140-degrees to break down the solids according to state and federal regulations. OWASA says their Biosolids have very low levels of pathogens and metals. UNC Pathologist Pam Groben suggested to the commissioners the money should go towards testing the Biosolids. (see video) The Board of Commissioners decided to defer the idea of educational forums until they were able to discuss the matter more. The commissioners would like more research done and are considering forming a task force. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 20 17:43:32 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:43:32 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Swineflu - wastewater treatment inadequate - wastewater carries superbugs Message-ID: http://www.wef.org/TechnicalDiscussions/Topic12825-15-1.aspx The discussion of swine flu (H1N1) in sewage would depend on fecal shedding. In its report on H5N1, WHO (WHO/SDE/WSH/06.1) notes on p.6---Routes of entry into sewage, that information was limited. There was isolation of H5N1 from the faeces of a child presenting with diarrhoea suggesting that this virus may be excreted by infected humans and thus can enter the sewer. The WHO also notes, at least for H5N1, that the virus can persist for extended periods of time in water. Sewer plants are large-scale generators of aerosols. Aerosols by definition remain suspended for extended periods, thus the drift into surrounding neighborhoods should be reviewed if: 1) H1N1 is fecal-borne, and 2) a large release hits a sewer plant---i.e., a major outbreak. Now, it has been said that chlorine which is used to disinfect sewage effluent will take care of these concerns. While that may be correct, the addition of chlorine is one of the last thing that happens in sewage processing. The aerosol generation is way up near the front of the process, not necessarily at the end of the processing. Some thought as to contingency plans should be developed by WEF or WERF. One suggestion has been brought forward and that is to cover the large open systems that are aerosol generators with sheets of plastic. Another potential source of aerosol generation is the sprinkler irrigation of reclaimed water. There are several good papers discussing the drift of pathogens from sprinkler irrigation. If that water is recycled wastewater, then there may be a problem. In their 2004 report to WERF, Rose, et al, as later republished by Harwood, noted that "Microorganisms were detected in disinfected effluent samples at the following frequencies: total coliforms, 63%; fecal coliforms, 27%; enterococci, 27%; C. perfringens, 61%; F-specific coliphages, ~40%; and enteric viruses, 31%. Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts were detected in 70% and 80%, respectively, of reclaimed water samples. Viable Cryptosporidium, based on cell culture infectivity assays, was detected in 20% of the reclaimed water samples. No strong correlation was found for any indicator-pathogen combination." Dr Edo McGowan ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; www.news-medical.net/.../Bacteria-create-aquatic-superbugs-in-waste-treatment-plants.aspx Bacteria create aquatic superbugs in waste treatment plants 13. May 2009 01:26 For bacteria in wastewater treatment plants, the stars align perfectly to create a hedonistic mating ground for antibiotic-resistant superbugs eventually discharged into streams and lakes. In the first known study of its kind, Chuanwu Xi of the University of Michigan School of Public Health and his team sampled water containing the bacteria Acinetobacter at five sites in and near Ann Arbor's wastewater treatment plant. They found the so-called superbugs---bacteria resistant to multiple antibiotics---up to 100 yards downstream from the discharge point into the Huron River. Xi stresses that while the finding may be disturbing, it is important to understand that much work is still needed to assess what risk, if any, the presence of superbugs in aquatic environments poses to humans. "We still need to understand the link between aquatic and human multiple drug resistant bacteria," said Xi, assistant professor of public health. Xi and colleagues found that while the total number of bacteria left in the final discharge effluent declined dramatically after treatment, the remaining bacteria was significantly more likely to resist multiple antibiotics than bacteria in water samples upstream. Some strains resisted as many as seven of eight antibiotics tested. The bacteria in samples taken 100 yards downstream also were more likely to resist multiple drugs than bacteria upstream. "Twenty or 30 years ago, antibiotics would have killed most of these strains, no problem," he said. Multiple antibiotic-resistant bacteria has emerged as one of the top public health issues worldwide in the last few decades as the overuse of antibiotics and other factors have caused bacteria to become resistant to common drugs. Xi's group chose to study Acinetobacter because it is a growing cause of hospital-acquired infections and because of its ability to acquire antibiotic resistance. Xi said the problem isn't that treatment plants don't do a good job of cleaning the water---it's that they simply aren't equipped to remove all antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals entering the treatment plants. The treatment process is fertile ground for the creation of superbugs because it encourages bacteria to grow and break down the organic matter. However, the good bacteria grow and replicate along with the bad. In the confined space, bacteria share resistant genetic materials, and remaining antibiotics and other stressors may select multi-drug resistant bacteria. While scientists learn more about so-called superbugs, patients can do their part by not insisting on antibiotics for ailments that antibiotics don't treat, such as a common cold or the flu, Xi said. Also, instead of flushing unused drugs, they should be saved and disposed of at designated collection sites so they don't enter the sewer system. The next step, said Xi, is to see how far downstream the superbugs survive and try to understand the link between aquatic and human superbugs. This study did not look past 100 yards. Xi's colleagues include visiting scholar Yongli Zhang; Carl Marrs, associate professor of public health; and Carl Simon, professor of mathematics. Their study, "Wastewater treatment contributes to selective increases of antibiotic resistance among Acinetobacter spp." is available through advance online publication at: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19321192?dopt=Abstract From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 25 09:49:57 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:49:57 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Black sludge gushes into Truro NS stream - town water runs brown Message-ID: 24/08/09 Sludge found in park was harmless, says engineer The Truro Daily News TRURO ? Black sludge detected last month in a stream in Victoria Park was a harmless, non-toxic substance, a Truro official says. ?It wasn?t anything toxic,? said town engineer Andrew MacKinnon. The black substance was reported in mid-July by town resident Elizabeth Lunny, who was sightseeing with visiting grandchildren. ?It was gushing out like black tar,? she said at the time, of the outflow from the drainpipe that ran down the side of a rockfall and into the stream below. MacKinnon said the sludge was created by town workers who had been cleaning out storm drains. Normally, the drains are flushed into sewage drains but, in this case, the flow was directed into a storm pipe by mistake. 25/08/09 Comments: jeff from Truro, ns writes: Well its all fine and dandy that its non-Toxic But i would still fell alot better knowing what it was... (last i checked sludge covers alot... and how to you mistake a storm pipe for a sewage drain? Posted 25/08/2009 at 1:52 AM Steve MacLellan from Truro, NS writes: I am more concerned with the health of the tap water. When it started to storm Sunday, as a precaution I filled my tub. The water was brown. There should have been an advisory from the local media so that folks weren't drinking and cooking with it -- you know, town water. I took a couple of pictures, and had a friend drop by who witnessed it. It's a known fact that during heavy rainfalls E. coli may be washed into creeks, rivers, streams, lakes, or groundwater. When these waters are used as sources of drinking water and the water is not treated or inadequately treated, E. coli may end up in drinking water. It could cause a lot of sickness around town, and people need to know about it. Posted 25/08/2009 at 6:51 AM Steve MacLellan from Truro, NS writes: Sorry, I should have given a link to the pictures of my tub with the brown water. You can see them here: http://homebusiness-websites.com/water.html Posted 25/08/2009 at 7:25 AM | Sarah from NS writes: I noticed my water had gone brown too on Sunday. I thought that was pretty odd since it's never occurred before outside of spring/fall flushings. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 25 13:12:51 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:12:51 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Swine flu - up to 90, 000 US deaths - wastewater absenteeism of 40% - sludge digestion ineffective Message-ID: Sludgewatch Admin: These dramatic predictions from the President's Advisory Panel point to a 50% infection rate. That will put the H1N1 virus into sewage - sludge - and effluent. Homeland Security has advised wastewater utilities to plan for 40% staff absenteeism...due in part to exposure from the H1N1 virus in sewage wastewater. With half the US expected to be ill, there will be huge levels of the virus in sewage and sewage sludge. Look at this French research report showing digestion (the main sludge process in North America) to be the LEAST effective at killing viruses .... only a 10% reduction in the digested sludge. Complete report: Clearance of Human-Pathogenic Viruses from Sludge Study of Four Stabilization Processes by Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR and Cell Culture.htm http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=520849 Isn't sewage sludge spreading going to expose migratory birds and other wildlife to the virus - allowing it to be spread up and down migratory flight paths? The virus will be released into surface water in runoff...and then more animals will be exposed...and more people. See EPA Pandemic sheet for the water sector below the CNN story http://www.waterquality.utah.gov/documents/PandemicInfluenzaWaterFactSheetDraftFinal-June26.pdf ................. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/08/24/us.swine.flu.projections/ Report: Swine flu could cause up to 90,000 U.S. deaths Story Highlights - Up to 50 percent of U.S. population could be infected this fall, winter - H1N1, plus seasonal flu, could place "enormous stress" on hospitals - Vaccine expected in mid-October, but too late to help many, panel says - Panel urges availability of some doses by mid-September August 25, 2009 - WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The H1N1 flu virus could cause up to 90,000 U.S. deaths, mainly among children and young adults, if it resurges this fall as expected, according to a report released Monday by a presidential advisory panel. The report urges speedier production of the H1N1 vaccine and the availability of some doses by September. The H1N1 virus, commonly known as swine flu virus, could infect between 30 percent and 50 percent of the American population during the fall and winter and lead to as many as 1.8 million U.S. hospital admissions, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology reported. The report says 30,000 to 90,000 deaths are projected as part of a "plausible scenario" involving large outbreaks at schools, inadequate antiviral supplies and the virus peaking before vaccinations have time to be effective. Up to 40,000 U.S. deaths are linked to seasonal flu each year, with most of the fatalities occurring among people over 65. With seasonal flu and H1N1, this fall is expected to bring more influenza deaths and place "enormous stress" on intensive care units nationwide, which normally operate near capacity, the report says. An H1N1 resurgence may happen as early as September, at the beginning of the school year, and infections may peak in mid-October, according to the report. However, the H1N1 vaccine isn't expected to be available until mid-October, and even then it will take several weeks for vaccinated individuals to develop immunity, the report says. Watch more on H1N1 predictions for this fall ? The potential "mismatch in timing" could significantly diminish the usefulness of the H1N1 vaccine, the report says. "Even with the best efforts, this will cause some illness, some severe illness and unfortunately, some deaths," Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said Monday. "But a lot so far has gone remarkably right," Frieden said. "There's a vaccine well on its way to being distributed, diagnostic tests available in well over 100 laboratories, treatments pre-positioned around the country ... and guidance issued for health care providers, schools, businesses and other communities." Among the report's recommendations are for government agencies to: ? Prepare several "planning scenarios" to determine demand for supplies and care. ? Set up surveillance systems to track information about influenza-like illnesses. ? Develop plans to protect the public's most vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women and those with pre-existing medical conditions. ? Speed up the production of the H1N1 vaccine and have an initial batch -- enough to vaccinate up to 40 million people, especially those who are at risk of serious disease -- by mid-September. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said the government's preparation and guidance for the public was based on the need to strike a balance "on a continuum of being paralyzed with fear versus complacency." So far, clinical trials for the H1N1 vaccine have not indicated adverse side effects beyond what are experienced with the seasonal flu vaccine, Sebelius said. However, there would be no formal decision to launch a vaccination campaign until those trials were complete, she said. That decision would be hers, she said, and she emphasized that any vaccination program would be strictly voluntary. Pregnant women, health care workers and parents or guardians of infants under 6 months of age are among the most vulnerable segments of the population, Sebelius has said. Adults under the age of 65 with an underlying health condition -- such as asthma -- are also considered to be more at risk from the H1N1 virus. H1N1 preparation guidelines for the nation's businesses and school systems were released three weeks ago. The plans are available at the Web site www.flu.gov. The H1N1 vaccine would require two shots, the second three weeks after the first. Immunity to the virus would not kick in until two weeks after the second shot. The World Health Organization declared the H1N1 virus a global pandemic on June 11. More than 1,490 people around the world have died from the virus since it emerged this spring, a WHO official said last week ............................. http://www.waterquality.utah.gov/documents/PandemicInfluenzaWaterFactSheetDraftFinal-June26.pdf Pandemic Influenza Fact Sheet for the Water Sector What is Pandemic Influenza? A pandemic is a global disease outbreak. A flu pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus emerges for which people have little or no immunity, and for which there is no vaccine. The disease spreads easily person-to-person, causes serious illness, and can sweep across the country and around the world in very short time. In June 2009, the World Health Organization declared a global H1N1 influenza pandemic. Why Should the Water Sector be Concerned About Pandemic Influenza? In a severe pandemic, absenteeism will increase from illness, the need to care for ill family members, and the fear of infection. This is predicted to reach up to 40% during the peak weeks of an outbreak. This absenteeism can affect drinking water and wastewater system operators and their capability to operate and maintain their systems adequately, thereby increasing the risks to public health. Absenteeism would also affect workers from other essential and interdependent sectors such as the transportation, power, and chemical sectors. It can have an adverse impact on services such as delivery of chemicals and other essential materials and supplies. Will Influenza Spread Through Drinking Water? There are no reports of flu outbreaks from ingesting water. Influenza viruses are typically spread by exposure to respiratory droplets created when infected persons cough or sneeze, not from ingesting drinking water. Generally speaking, research has shown that chlorination and filtration methods that are typically used are effective in removing viruses from drinking water. Where groundwater is used, virus particles become diluted in the large volume of groundwater they mix with. In those cases where there is concern that groundwater may have become contaminated with an influenza virus, public water suppliers and private well users should contact their local and state drinking water and health experts to determine if precautions should be taken before the well water is used for drinking water. Will Influenza Spread Through Wastewater? Viruses may survive in untreated wastewater. Thus, utilities should take extra precaution to ensure that workers do not come into direct contact with untreated wastewater. However, research conducted to date on water treatment has shown that chlorination, ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and anaerobic digestion are effective in eliminating certain influenza A virus subtypes from water. What Can Water and Wastewater Utilities do to Prepare? Utilities that fail to prepare for the likelihood of pandemic flu may find themselves without the staff, equipment, or supplies necessary to continue providing safe drinking water or treating wastewater for their community. Utilities should integrate pandemic planning into existing business continuity and emergency response plans using available guidance documents for assistance. Planning actions that utilities may undertake include (1) identifying essential functions, services, processes, critical staffing needs, and interdependent relationships, (2) assessing supply chains and coordinating with vendors, (3) developing a communications strategy, and (4) working with community pandemic planners. What is EPA Doing to Help Utilities Prepare? EPA offers free tools and guidance materials to help utilities develop plans to prepare for and respond to pandemic influenza outbreaks. All of these documents are available at a new EPA webpage (URL to be created). Available resources include the Department of Homeland Security Annex: Water and Wastewater Sector Pandemic Guideline, a Pandemic Flu Tabletop Exercise for water and wastewater utilities, EPA New England?s Top 10 List: Pandemic and Natural Disasters Notebook, this fact sheet, and links to other useful websites and planning information. What Other Flu Specific Guidance is Available to Help Utilities Prepare? The Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies? Business Continuity Planning in the Event of an Influenza Pandemic: A Reference Guide and the National Rural Water Association?s Small System Pandemic Influenza Checklist are available from these associations. Read your State?s pandemic plan (http://www.pandemicflu.gov/plan/states/stateplans.html). Also, consult OSHA guidelines on how to prepare your workplace and protect employees during a pandemic (http://www.osha.gov/Publications/influenza_pandemic.html). Will Vaccines be Available? Vaccination is one of the most effective ways to minimize suffering and death from influenza. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is the lead agency for expanding domestic influenza vaccine production capacity and producing a pandemic influenza vaccine. However, at the beginning of a pandemic, the scarcity of a vaccine will require that the limited supply be allocated or prioritized for distribution and administration. The U.S. Government has developed Guidance on Allocating and Targeting Pandemic Influenza Vaccine (www.pandemicflu.gov/vaccine/allocationguidance.pdf). This document provides guidance to states, territories, and tribes on the allocation of limited supplies of pandemic vaccine to different population groups, such as those who maintain essential community services like the water sector. What Other Interventions May be Used? There are a number of interventions that will be implemented to mitigate the effects of an influenza pandemic. Non-pharmaceutical interventions such as social distancing and infection control techniques such as hand-washing and cough etiquette will play a critical role in pandemic mitigation. Antiviral drugs may help prevent infection in people considered at risk and lessen the impact of symptoms in those infected with influenza. Antiviral drugs can also be used for prevention, and public and private sector entities may choose to stockpile antiviral drugs for this purpose. Where Can I go for Additional Information? Visit www.pandemicflu.gov. This site is managed by HHS and provides one-stop access to U.S. government pandemic, H1N1, and avian (H5N1) influenza information. You may also visit EPA and CDC?s pandemic flu websites (www.epa.gov/pandemicflu) and (www.cdc.gov/flu/Pandemic). Office of Water (4608-T) EPA XXX-X-XX-XXX Month 2009 www.epa.gov/watersecurity From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Tue Aug 25 13:20:51 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:20:51 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Sewage sludge anaerobic digestion does not kill viruses in sludge effectively Message-ID: For best formatting and to read the graphs...read this at the website below: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=520849 Clearance of Human-Pathogenic Viruses from Sludge: Study of Four Stabilization Processes by Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR and Cell Culture S. Monpoeho,1* A. Maul,2 C. Bonnin,3 L. Patria,3 S. Ranarijaona,1 S. Billaudel,1 and V. Ferr?1 Laboratoire de Virologie, UPRES 1156, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Nantes,1Department of Statistics and Data Processing, Institut Universitaire de Technologie, Metz,2Anjou Recherche Vivendi Water, Paris, France, 3 *Corresponding author. Mailing address: 151 Calderon Ave. #34, Mountain View, CA 94041. Phone: (650) 225-2978. Fax: (650) 969-5004. E-mail: monpeo at mageos.com or monpeo at gene.com. Received January 13, 2004; Accepted March 10, 2004. ABSTRACT: Sludges derived from wastewater treatment are foul-smelling, biologically unstable substances. As well as containing numerous pathogenic microorganisms, they also consist of organic matter that can be used as agricultural fertilizer. Legislation nevertheless requires sludges to be virologically tested prior to spreading by the counting of infectious enterovirus particles. This method, based on culture of enterovirus on BGM cells, is lengthy and not very sensitive. The aim of this study was to propose an alternative method of genome quantification for all enteroviruses that is applicable to verifying the elimination of viruses in complex samples such as sludges. Our complete protocol was compared to the official method, consisting of enterovirus enumeration with the most probable number of cythopathic unit (MPNCU) assay through the study of four stabilization procedures: liming, composting, heat treatment, and mesophile anaerobic digestion. Enterovirus quantities at the start of the stabilization procedures were between 37 and 288 MPNCU/g on the one scale and between 4 and 5 log genome copies/g on the other. It was shown that all procedures except mesophile anaerobic digestion were highly effective in the elimination of enterovirus particles and genomes in wastewater sludges. Reduction of viruses by mesophile anaerobic digestion was by only 1 log (infectious particles and genomes). In conclusion, stabilization processes can indeed be checked by virological quality control of sludges with gene amplification. However, the infectivity of genomes needs to be confirmed with cell culture or a correlation model if the virological risk inherent in the agricultural use of such sludges is to be fully addressed. Full Study: Sludges derived from wastewater treatment are foul-smelling, biologically unstable substances. They contain numerous pathogenic microorganisms, mostly of fecal origin. They also consist of organic matter that can be put to agricultural use as fertilizer. Agricultural use, in the form of spreading on the land, is the principal means by which sludge is disposed of and can only be of lasting value if the sludge has undergone treatment by biological, chemical, thermal, or other suitable processes to diminish its capacity for fermentation and eliminate any health risk related to such use. With the aim of reducing the risk of viral contamination associated with spreading such sludges, French legislation (decree of 8 January 1998 related to the landing of sewage sludge on agricultural soils) requires that microbiological testing be carried out for validation of stabilization processes. The virological testing method currently specified (appendix 5, table 6b of the decree) is based on the counting of enterovirus particles in culture on buffalo green monkey (BGM) cells with the most probable number of cytopathic units (MPNCU) method. This method is lengthy and not very sensitive. We have recently developed a virological quality control method for testing sludges from water treatment plants based on gene amplification with TaqMan technology (16) and on a viral extraction technique compatible with both PCR and cell culture (17). Hitherto, false-negative responses have been averted by spiking all negative specimens with the RNA standard for a second run, an impractical, laborious, and very expensive solution. The aim in this study was to improve our previous technique for genome quantification (16, 17) by including an internal PCR quality control and to evaluate the efficacy, in terms of viral decontamination, of four sludge treatment processes (liming, composting, mesophile anaerobic digestion, and heat treatment) used in plants in different parts of France. The efficacy of these processes in eliminating viruses was evaluated by comparing enterovirus infectious particle quantities before and after sludge stabilization. The counting method specified in the legislation was then carried out in parallel with our technique for genome quantification, the TaqMan reverse transcription (RT)-PCR method. Top Abstract MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES MATERIALS AND METHODSLime stabilization process. Liming is used in two wastewater treatment plants, plants 1 and 2. Their capacities are 600,000 and 120,000 equivalent inhabitants, respectively. Here, the process consists of the addition of quicklime at a proportion of 50% dry matter to the biological sludge, which has previously undergone thickening and dehydration. The mixture is homogenized in a twin-screw mixer-aerator equipped with a piston pump, which allows the limed sludge to be sent to the storage silo. After cooling, the limed sludge has a pH between 12.5 and 13. Composting process. Aerobic composting is used in one treatment plant whose capacity varies along with a seasonal influx of tourists: 12,500 equivalent inhabitants out of season and 80,000 equivalent inhabitants in season. The process here consists of aerating a mixture of dehydrated sludge and ground tree bark, which is then left to compost for 3 or 4 weeks. The maturing compost is next put through a sifter to homogenize it, and the resulting product is left to compost further for a minimum of 3 months in maturation racks. Temperatures of between 20 and 68?C are reached during this process. Mesophile anaerobic digestion. Mesophile anaerobic digestion is used in one treatment plant with a capacity of 200,000 equivalent inhabitants. Thickened sludge is sent to two digesters, one primary and the other secondary. The process of anaerobic fermentation takes place in the primary digester for 14 days at 36?C. The function of the secondary digester is storage, and the sludge that it contains is stirred intermittently for 9 days. The secondary digester allows the particles to be completely methanized, separates out and discharges floating matter, and facilitates a certain degree of thickening of the sludge. The total time that the sludge spends in the digesters is therefore 23 days. Heat treatment. Heat treatment is used in one treatment plant with a capacity of 7 million equivalent inhabitants. In this plant, sludge first undergoes mesophile anaerobic digestion and is then thickened and heated to 195?C in a pressure vat at a pressure of 19 to 21 bars for 100 min. Sludge samples. For the composting and mesophile anaerobic digestion processes, this study did not involve following a single batch of sludge through the different stages of the processes. The time elapsing between the beginning and end of processing was from 3 weeks to several months for composting and 23 days for anaerobic digestion. It was therefore more practical for us to carry out monthly sampling at several stages of the process, which in any case reflected the state of progress in the stabilization procedure. The samples most commonly described as preprocessing by staff at the plants did not, in fact, comprise primary sludge derived directly from wastewater. In general, they consisted of primary sludge that had undergone dehydration or thickening immediately before the stabilization process. Liming stabilization process. Two types of sludge were sampled at monthly intervals during the course of the liming stabilization process: upstream dehydrated sludge (18 to 20% dry matter) and limed sludge (30 to 33% dry matter); 500-g samples of the dehydrated sludge were taken leaving the centrifuge, and 500-g samples of limed sludge were taken from the storage silo. Twelve samples for each sludge type and for each treatment plant, making a total of 48 samples, were analyzed over a 1-year period (January 2000 to December 2000). Composting process. Five types of sample, each of 1 kg, corresponding to the different stages of the process, were taken at monthly intervals for the study: dehydrated sludge (18 to 20% dry matter), mixture of sludge and coproduct (29 to 30% dry matter), compost before sifting (38 to 40% dry matter), compost after sifting (45%), and the mature end product (60 to 80% dry matter). They were sent by post (4 to 5 days transit time) and were stored at +4?C (for a maximum of 3 days) if analysis could not be carried out on reception. This treatment plant was followed up for a period of 10 months, and a total of 49 sludge samples were analyzed. Mesophile anaerobic digestion. Samples of 1 liter were taken at monthly intervals of sludge entering the primary digester (thickened sludge, 3.5 to 6% dry matter) and sludge leaving the secondary digester (digested sludge, 2 to 3% dry matter). They were dispatched to the laboratory by post (48 h) and stored at +4?C (for a maximum of 3 days) if analysis could not be carried out on reception. This treatment plant was followed up for a period of 10 months, and a total of 20 sludge samples were analyzed. Heat treatment. Samples of 1 liter of sludge entering (digested and thickened sludge, 3 to 4% dry matter) and leaving (treated sludge, 1 to 2% dry matter) the pressure vat were taken. They were dispatched to the laboratory by post (48 h) and stored at +4?C (for a maximum of 3 days) if analysis could not be carried out on reception. This treatment plant was followed up for a period of 7 months, and 14 sludge samples were analyzed. Test sample. The exact test sample was the equivalent of 5 g (dry matter) for sludge whose siccity was known at the time of analysis, which was the case for sludge from the liming process. The siccities of the sludges from the other processes reached us 1 month after analysis. Accordingly, for the digestion and heat treatment processes, 50 ml of sludge entering the process and 100 ml of the end product were sampled; and for the composting process, 25 g (dry matter) of dehydrated sludge, 25 g of the mixture of sludge and coproduct, 10 g of sludge before and after sifting, and 6 g of the mature compost were sampled. The results we re subsequently adjusted to 1 g of dry matter once the values for siccity were available. Virus elution. Virus was eluted from sludge with a technique adapted from that described by Ahmed and Sorensen (2). To a sludge volume yielding 5 g of dry matter, 100 ml of 10% beef extract (pH 8; LP029B; Oxoid) was added, the mixture was stirred at 700 oscillations/min for 30 min with the Flask Shaker SF-1 (Sigma-Aldrich, France), and then centrifuged at 5,000 ? g for 1 h at 4?C. The supernatant, adjusted to pH 7.2 (if necessary), constituted the extract. Virus concentration. For virus concentration, we used polyethylene glycol 6000 precipitation as described by Lewis and Metcalf (12); 8% (wt/vol) polyethylene glycol 6000 (in a phosphate solution at pH 7.2) was added to each extract. After rigorous agitation, the mixture was kept at 4?C overnight and then centrifuged at 10,000 ? g for 90 min at 4?C. The pellet, suspended in 12 ml of phosphate buffer (pH 7.2), constituted the concentrate; as a final step, the pellet was decontaminated by adding 0.33 volume of chloroform. Virus counting by means of cell culture. Infectious enteroviruses were counted by inoculating decontaminated concentrates into in vitro buffalo green monkey cell cultures in 96-well microplates. All cultures were inoculated in duplicate, with 40 wells for each dilution. Each well was filled with 50 ?l of inoculum and 200 ?l of nutritive medium (minimal essential medium; Life Technologies) with 5% newborn calf serum containing 1.5 ? 105 cells/ml. The cells were incubated at 37?C in 5% CO2 for 5 days. Viral density was determined from the cytopathogenic effects observed after duplicate inoculation of cell layers with three successive fivefold dilutions of a sample. After confirmation by transfer of 50-?l portions of the supernatants to new microplates, the mean viral concentration of the samples was estimated by the most-probable-number method with the software described by Maul (15). Thus, each viral concentration was determined from a combination of the positive responses observed in the 40 wells inoculated for each of three successive fivefold dilutions. The final result for each sample analyzed was expressed as the geometric mean of the concentrations calculated for two independent replicates. The results were expressed in MPNCU per milliliter of concentrate and then converted to MPNCU per gram (dry weight) of sludge in order to take account of sludge dryness. Extraction of viral RNA. Enterovirus RNA was extracted from 400 ?l of concentrate with an RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen, Courtaboeuf, France) according to the manufacturer's instructions. However, a modified lysis buffer containing 2% (wt/vol) polyvinylpyrrolidone 40,000 (Sigma, France) was used (16, 17). Primers and probes for quantification by multiplex fluorogenic RT-PCR. The primers and probes used for enterovirus amplification were as already published: Ev1 (5?-GATTGTCACCATAAGCAGC-3?), Ev2 (5?-CCCCTGAATGCGGCTAATC-3?), and Ev-probe (5?-FAM-CGGAACCGACTACTTTGGGTGTCCGT-TAMRA-phosphor-3?; FAM is 6-carboxyfluorescein, and TAMRA is 6-carboxytetramethylrhodamine) (16, 17). For absolute quantification, an enterovirus RNA standard representing the 5? noncoding region of enterovirus RNA was synthesized in vitro by plasmid cloning and in vitro transcription with cDNA from Mahoney type 1 poliovirus and primers Ev1Clon (5?-TGGCCAATCGAATTCGCTTTA-3?) and Ev2Clon (5?-CTACATAAGGATCCTCCGGCC-3?) (16, 17). Internal positive control. An exogenous internal positive control was introduced into each reaction well in order to prevent false-negative results. This was an RNA template transcribed from plasmid pAW109 (pAW109 RNA), purchased from Applera France and used as an internal amplification quality marker. We designed the primers and probe with the software Primer Express (Applera) in order to use this RNA in a PCR duplex format to monitor the amplification reaction quality. The software defined the primers pAW1 (5?-TCCCCAGGAACAGTTGAAAGA-3?) and pAW2 (5?-AACAGGGAACCCAGGCTCC-3?) and pAW-probe (5?-TET-CAGTGCCTGCCCATTCGGAGGA-TAMRA-phosphor-3?; TET is 6-tetrachlorofluorescein). The compatibility of these primers and probe with enterovirus amplification was tested with the software Oligo 4 (National Biosciences, Inc.) in order to determine the multiplex conditions. Reaction mixture. The reaction mixture (final volume, 25 ?l) was prepared in a single tube as follows: 1? TaqMan buffer (Eurogentec), 6 mM MgCl2 (Applera), 700 ?M deoxynucleoside triphosphates (Eurogentec), 120 nM each of primers Ev1 and Ev2 (Genosys, Pampisford, England), 100 nM Ev-probe (Eurogentec), 60 nM each of primers pAW1 and pAW2 (Genosys), 80 nM pAW-probe (Eurogentec), 1.5% PVP-25 (Coger), 0.6 ?g bovine serum albumin (Roche Diagnostic), 2 ?g of T4 gene 32 protein (Roche Diagnostic), 1.5 U of murine leukemia virus reverse transcriptase (Applera), 1.5 U of HotStart Gold (Eurogentec), 20 U of RNasin (Promega), and 1 ?l of internal positive control RNA (1,000 copies/?l); 20 ?l of the reaction mixture was added to PCR tubes containing 5 ?l of RNA extract from sludge samples or RNA standard in serial dilution. Enterovirus RNA and the internal positive control RNA were reverse transcribed into cDNA (40 min at 50.1?C), followed by a murine leukemia virus Taq Gold denaturation-activation step (10 min at 94?C). The cDNA fragments were amplified by PCR (15 s at 94?C and 1 min at 60?C) for 45 cycles on an ABI Prism 7700 (Applera). Controls. The BGM cell culture microplates inoculated with samples were compared to the microplate inoculated with the assay medium only for cytopathic effect. The negative control for reverse transcription-PCR was the RNA diluent. Analysis of fluorescence signals with the ABI Prism 7700. Real-time fluorescence measurements were obtained, and the threshold cycle (CT) value for each sample was calculated by determining the point at which fluorescence exceeded a threshold limit (10 times the baseline standard deviation). A standard graph of the CT values obtained with a serially diluted external RNA standard was prepared. CT values obtained from the sludge samples were plotted on the standard curve, and the number of copies was calculated automatically by the software Sequence Detector v1.7 (Applera). Validation of results. Results were validated, in essence, by evaluating the quality of amplification in the reaction tube. The quality of amplification was evaluated by the CT of the internal positive control (CT-ipc). In practice, we chose to validate those results for which CT-ipc was 12) to be obtained at all points of the blend of sludge and lime. Moreover, the use of quicklime tends to raise the temperature, increasing the efficacy of decontamination. For composting, enterovirus inactivation was appreciable from the first stage when sludge was mixed with the coproduct. The addition of structure-providing carbonaceous matter or of metals (e.g., Cu2+) in the bark may promote the irreversible adsorption or the inactivation of the viruses. When the compost was sifted, i.e., after 3 or 4 weeks of fermentation, the temperature reached 65?C; enterovirus infectious particles were completely eliminated, while genomes remained present at a very low level before disappearing in the mature end product. It should, however, be pointed out that levels of enterovirus infectious particles present in the sludge prior to treatment (9.7E + 03 copies/g dry matter) appeared low, and this perhaps contributed to the good results observed with this process. One reason for such low virus levels may be sludge dehydration (strip filtering) before composting. Composting is a heat-dependent stabilization process, and the temperatures reached during treatment (55 to 70?C) seem sufficiently high to eliminate enteric microorganisms (26, 30). Such temperatures are capable of promoting a decrease in virus of between 3 and 4 log10. Dehydration also plays an important role in virus inactivation by rupturing the virus capsid and releasing nucleic acid (29). >From the point of view of testing technique, attention should be drawn to two points: the frequent presence of PCR inhibitors in the compost extracts (38.7%), which made it necessary to carry out dilutions of 1:2 or 1:4 for the results obtained to be correctly interpreted; since these inhibitors were not found in the dehydrated sludge, they must have been derived from the coproduct, the tree bark; and the extreme heterogeneousness of the material which, during the composting process, made the taking of test samples difficult to reproduce. For mesophile anaerobic digestion, the results of our study confirm the low decontaminating power of this process in virological terms. The mean level of virus decrease (87.5%) in terms of infectious particles is comparable to that reported in the literature (80 to 90%) (8, 26). Virus inactivation depends on a number of parameters, of which the temperature of digestion and chemical and biological factors apparently play an important role. Between 30 and 37?C, 50 to 90% of poliovirus I (Sabin) is inactivated (3, 6), while at 50?C the level of decrease can reach 99.99% (22). However, the contribution of the temperature in mesophile anaerobic digestion (35?C) has been estimated to be between 19% (27) and 46% (22). Other factors such as ammonium, detergents, bacterial enzymes, or microorganisms may also play a part (28). Ammonium inactivates viruses at a pH of more than 8 (22) and causes fragmentation of RNA (10). In this study, the pH measured in the vat, which was generally alkaline (mean, 7.85), was sometimes over 8, and a decrease in infectious particles (87.5%) parallel to the loss of genomes (85%) was observed. Partial degradation of genome RNA has previously been shown (32) by a decrease in the sedimentation coefficient of RNA extracted from virus that had spent 10 days in a mesophile digester. The suggested mechanism was limited proteolysis of the viral capsid with infiltration by ammonium or any other substance capable of degrading RNA. Proof of the role of chemical and biological factors has also been contributed by the work of Spillmann et al. (25), who have shown that a virus as heat resistant as parvovirus (1 h at 56?C) is two or three times more sensitive to mesophile digestion than rotaviruses and coxsackieviruses. In the months of June, July, September, and November, only genomes could be quantified (9,100 to 24,000 copies/g) in sludge after mesophile anaerobic digestion. They were most likely being protected by a virus capsid. Two possibilities can be considered: the genomes detected belonged to enteroviruses that are difficult to grow in BGM cell culture (echovirus and coxsackievirus A), or virus capsids were partially damaged, making culture impossible but leaving the virus RNA intact, either in its entirety or at least in the 5? noncoding region. Alteration of the virus capsid when viruses are adsorbed onto solid particles in suspension has been shown by some authors (18, 19, 33, 34). But, as a general rule, the phenomenon of adsorption allows the physical integrity of a virus to be protected from chemical or biological factors present in the digester (5, 13, 24) and therefore to conserve its RNA. Virus adsorption in combination with a minimally raised temperature (35?C) could thus explain the relatively low efficacy of the mesophile anaerobic digestion process (22, 31). For heat treatment, no microorganism proved capable of resisting 100 min at 195?C at a pressure of 21 bars, and thus theoretically, of the four processes studied, this process clearly has by far the highest decontaminating power. During this study, the absence of genomes corresponded every time to the absence of infectious virus particles, which agrees with other studies in the literature (7, 11). Nevertheless, one discordance should be pointed out in the results of the composting treatment. The February sample of the sludge-coproduct mixture (Table (Table2)2) which contained no enterovirus RNA but showed, on BGM cell culture, an enterovirus viral load of 92 MPNCU/g. It is true that the RNA extract contained PCR inhibitors, but the 1:4 dilution (hence the From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Wed Aug 26 20:03:19 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:03:19 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Virginia - protect the Blue Ridge Railway hiking trail from sludge Message-ID: A Voice Crying in the Wilderness Against Sludge The News & Advance Published: August 26, 2009 When it comes to having a voice on whether sewage sludge can be spread in Amherst County, the Board of Supervisors has done just about all it can do. Under state law, however, that is not much. Synagro Central LLC, one of at least two companies in Virginia that contract with municipal sewage treatment facilities along the East Coast, has informed the county that it intends to spread biosolids on land adjacent to the Virginia Blue Ridge Railway Trail. The 132 acres in the northern part of the county belongs to Wesley Wright. The property is next to the trail, which begins at Piney River in Nelson County and follows the river for almost two miles to Roses Mill in Amherst County. The sludge, or biosolids as the industry that hauls the substance prefers to call it, is a mix of treated human waste and industrial sewage. Rich in nutrients, the material is applied to hayfields and pasture lands at no cost to the farmer who owns the land. It amounts to free fertilizer for the farmer, whose land becomes a repository for the solid waste that otherwise would have to go to a landfill. A debate on whether the sludge has the potential to cause health problems has been going unabated for several years. Some studies claim that biosolids cause an array of health problems. Others suggest that the waste is an environmentally friendly fertilizer that poses no health hazards. So what can the supervisors in Amherst do about the firm?s intent to spread the sludge? They have sent a letter to the director of the state Department of Environmental Quality asking that it not allow the firm to spread biosolids on farmland near the trail. The letter points out that more than $2 million has been invested in the trail, including $1.4 million in federal grants. Amherst and Nelson counties have contributed some $40,000 to construction of the trail, which follows the former railway track. The letter also calls the DEQ?s attention to odors caused by spreading the sludge and potential health risks for those who use the trail. ?Any dumping, spreading or discharging of biosolids on lands adjacent to the trail could potentially negatively impact, disrupt or shut down one-half of all significant recreational trails in Amherst County,? it says. The letter could have suggested the folly of spreading the nutrients near the Piney River. Heavy rains could wash them into the river, which is part of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Once those nutrients reach the bay, they help feed the algae bloom, which along with other problems degrades the bay?s water quality. While localities have no authority to prohibit spreading the sewage sludge, they can enact local ordinances to test the material, which Amherst has done. The county has an agreement in place with a Sweet Briar College professor to monitor spreading biosolids on farmland in the county. Those who use the Virginia Blue Ridge Railway Trail have objected to past proposals to spread the sludge so close to the trail. The DEQ should take those who use the trail for recreational purposes into mind before it gives the green light to Synagro. It?s the least the state could do to give a voice to the county that objects to spreading biosolids, but has little say over whether it can go forward. http://www2.newsadvance.com/lna/news/opinion/editorials/article/a_voice_crying_in_the_wilderness_against_sludge/18871/ From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 27 05:43:14 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 05:43:14 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Atrazine in US Drinking Water Found Widespread In-Reply-To: <802B2951F9F4404A8BC43F8F8855F5A0@home> References: <802B2951F9F4404A8BC43F8F8855F5A0@home> Message-ID: From: , Organic Consumers Association, More from this Affiliate Published August 26, 2009 06:39 AM Atrazine in US Drinking Water Found Widespread RELATED ARTICLES * Report: Atrazine Contaminates Midwest Drinking Water September 11, 2007 * USGS profiles private wells April 23, 2009 * Pesticides Found Throughout the Nation's Streams March 6, 2006 * USGS: Florida Aquifers and Drinking Water Supplies Contaminated With Pesticides, VOC's A widely used pesticide known to impact wildlife development and, potentially, human health has contaminated watersheds and drinking water throughout much of the United States, according to a new report released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Banned by the European Union, atrazine is the most commonly detected pesticide in U.S. waters and is a known endocrine disruptor, which means that it affects human and animal hormones. It has been tied to poor sperm quality in humans and hermaphroditic amphibians. "Evidence shows Atrazine contamination to be a widespread and dangerous problem that has not been communicated to the people most at risk," said Jennifer Sass, PhD, NRDC Senior Scientist and an author of the report. "U.S. EPA is ignoring some very high concentrations of this pesticide in water that people are drinking and using every day. This exposure could have a considerable impact on reproductive health. Scientific research has tied this chemical to some ghastly impacts on wildlife and raises red flags for possible human impacts." The report reveals that all of the watersheds monitored by EPA and 90% of the drinking water sampled tested positive for atrazine. Contamination was most severe in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, and Nebraska. An extensive U.S. Geological Survey study found that approximately 75 percent of stream water and about 40 percent of all groundwater samples from agricultural areas contained atrazine, and according to the New York Times, an estimated 33 million Americans have been exposed to atrazine through their drinking water systems.\ "The extent of contamination we found in the data was breathtaking and alarming," said Andrew Wetzler, Director of NRDC's Wildlife Conservation Program and Deputy Director of NRDC's Midwest Program, as well as one of the report's authors. "The EPA found atrazine almost everywhere they looked. I think that the public will find this hard to swallow and I hope it will help force the EPA to address the situation more aggressively." Figure shows locations of the areas where contamination was found. Article continues: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18931.cfm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 47845 bytes Desc: not available URL: From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Thu Aug 27 05:53:36 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 05:53:36 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> British Columbia - proposed sludge compost site worries neighbors Message-ID: Waste proposal worries locals By Sarah Simpson, The Citizen August 21, 2009 Chemainus resident Alex Currie is worried his town will "be exposed...in ways that one cannot fathom," if the Cowichan Valley Regional District grants a license to Victoria's Chemainus Composting Inc. to operate a composting operation at the old Doman lumber operation on the east side of the highway just north of Henry Road. "They have applied to manage wood waste and biosolids (aka sludge waste from waste water sewage treatment plants)," said Currie in a letter to the Citizen. "If anyone has experience with biosolids being applied for agricultural purposes as is done in Ontario, this stuff is the most vile smelling material one can imagine," wrote Currie. "It permeates everything in the area it is found, will cause one to gag and destroys the quality of life." CVRD Environmental Technologist Harmony Huffman said the company is currently working with North Cowichan to get their business license in place and with the CVRD to obtain a facility management license. "There is a lot of wood on that site that has been buried, from back when it was a mill/log dump/ grinding operation back in the old days," said Huffman. "They are proposing to remediate the site and one way in which they can do that is by excavating the wood waste and turning it into compost." The process has Currie worried about the potential negative impact on the surrounding community. "According to web sites they can ad materials to reduce odours of the biosolids as well as the off gases that are produced in the composting process but elimination is not possible," he wrote. "One also has to be concerned about run-off into creeks and streams in the area." Huffman said the proponent plans to contain the entire facility. "Given that it's not located directly adjacent to any urban areas, I wouldn't anticipate that odour is going to be a big concern," she said. One management tool is the containment of the whole facility, which would not only mitigate smell, but prevent leeching of compost juices into the surrounding area. "The entire composting process would be contained, both in a building and the proponent is also proposing to use an in-vessel composting technology, so it's actually a dual cover because the compost itself is under cover and the whole thing is in a building." Other ventilation systems would also be used, said Huffman. The CVRD welcomes feedback from worried residents. "Right now we are doing a public notification so anybody that does have any concerns or comments about it can forward that to us and we can take those into consideration when we're deciding whether or not to issue the license," said Huffman. http://www.canada.com/Waste+proposal+worries+locals/1916462/story.html From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 28 15:38:01 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:38:01 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Hinkley Calif Residents Prevail in Sewage Sludge Challenge Message-ID: For immediate release: August 27, 2009 NEWS RELEASE Hinkley Residents Prevail in Sewage Sludge Challenge Judge Strikes Down Sludge Composting Rule in High Desert Hinkley, California ? A group of residents in Hinkley, the rural California town in the Mojave airbasin, has prevailed in its lawsuit against the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) over the District?s rule that would have allowed sewage sludge composting facilities to operate with no meaningful pollution controls. "Our communities have the right to breathe clean air and raise our families in a healthy environment " says Norm Diaz of HelpHinkley.org. "While California?s waste and sewage sludge should be handled responsibly, we refuse to become the dumping ground for California?s sewage.? The community group HelpHinkley.org, represented by attorneys at the Center on Race, Poverty & the Environment (CRPE), argued that sewage sludge composting rule violated state air pollution control laws and that the District failed to disclose or analyze the air pollution that would be actually created by a rule that would attract sewage sludge facilities. A key finding in the decision was the ?unusual circumstances? created by the District, because it chose to adopt a weaker rule than in the San Joaquin Valley or neighboring Los Angeles area,which would likely result in a rush to bring sewage sludge to the Mojave area. San Bernardino County Superior Court Judge John Vander Feer agreed, ruling that the MDAQMD must analyze the impacts to area residents and the environment, and that the District must comply with recently adopted state law intended to reduce air pollution. A key finding in the decision was the ?unusual circumstances? created by the District, because it chose to adopt a weaker rule than what regulators adopted in the San Joaquin Valley or in the Los Angeles area. Judge Vander Feer ruled that this less stringent rule would likely result in a rush to bring sewage sludge facilities to the Mojave area. "The regulators at the Air District refused to listen to us and were more interested in encouraging industry than they were with protecting the air quality and people of the High Desert,? added Diaz. ?Now, the District must obey the law to reduce air pollution and tell us what will happen to our community if they continue to favor industry over people.? About HelpHinkley.org: HelpHinkley.org is a nonprofit organization sponsored by the Agape Foundation to promote health and safety in the communities of Hinkley and Barstow, California. The organization formed in 2006 in response to a proposed open-air sewage sludge dump to be located upwind from these communities. The group works through nonviolent, nonpolitical group actions for positive change. The goal of HelpHinkley.org is to make the Hinkley/Barstow area a safer,healthier place to live and raise children. The group has 300 members and is expanding itsconcerns to other local issues. http://www.helphinkley.org/ About the Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment: The Center on Race, Poverty and the Environment is an environmental justice advocacy organization dedicated to helping grassroots groups across the United States attack head on the disproportionate burden of pollution borne by poor people and people of color. CRPE provides organizing, technical, and legal assistance to help community groups stop immediate environmental threats. http://www.crpe-ej.org/ From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 28 16:20:23 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:20:23 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Berkebile: Sludge dispute left elderly man dead - a year later assailant not yet charged In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Last summer an 81 year old retired Smithsonian Institute curator was struck and killed in an altercation with a neighbor who spreads sludge. The elderly deceased had claimed that sludge had contaminated his drinking water well. The death of the retired curator was ruled a homicide. see: http://list.web.net/archives/sludgewatch-l/2008-July/003858.html A year later, the assailant has not yet been charged. Police have been waiting for more than a year for crime lab results. Now the fellow who killed the retired curator is suing the dead man's estate for 'humiliation' among other things. A website has been spawned by the situation: http://www.justicefordon.info ................................... http://www.topix.com/forum/city/hughesville-pa/T42TV4SNFVRVN212I Crime lab holds up decision in Berkebile death By VICKY TAYLOR Staff writer It's been more than a year since 81-year-old Donald Berkebile of Montgomery Township died in a fight with his neighbor. During that time, the Franklin County District Attorney's office has held open its investigation into the death, waiting for lab results on crucial evidence from Pennsylvania State Police forensics experts. The man who killed Berkebile has not been charged with a crime. Now the DA's office has another death investigation under way as a result of another dispute -- one between neighbors in Southampton Township on Aug. 13. District Attorney Jack Nelson said Friday that investigators were told it would take six months for the forensics lab to examine the ballistics evidence in the most recent case. "We were told the evidence in the Berkebile case would take three months, and it has already been over a year," he said. "It's frustrating, because this is something we need before we can make a decision in the case." Now he faces similar problems with a second case, this time one in which a man has already been charged with homicide. "We are totally frustrated," he said. "We are going to have to look at alternatives (to depending on the state police lab to test evidence)." He said his office will have to explore the possibility of using independent experts to do the forensics testing on evidence. He said testing the evidence sent to the PSP lab over a year ago in the Berkebile case entailed "a very basic procedure." "The tests we are asking them to do aren't very difficult, but it is something we need to have before we can make a decision (in the Berkebile case)," he said. Nelson said his office has been in touch with the lab on "a constant basis" over the past year, asking when the lab results will be ready. Assistant District Attorney Jeremiah Zook, who is heading up the case for the DA's office, said he has been told there is a shortage of qualified personnel at the state lab to do the work. He said he has also been told that the lab must prioritize the work they do, giving evidence needed for pending trials priority over non-trial cases or pending investigations such as the Berkebile case. "We are getting fed up with the delays, but we are at their mercy," Zook said. "They are the individuals with the qualifications and expertise to do this." Nelson agrees. "Obviously it's a case of having qualified personnel to do the testing, but we are paying the price (for that shortage of personnel)," he said. Lt. Myra A. Taylor, public information coordinator with PSP's Troop H in Harrisburg, said the state's Bureau of Forensic Services gets evidence from all PSP investigations as well as over 1,200 municipal police departments and at times in federal investigations. She said the goal for case turnaround is between 60 and 90 days, but sometimes that goal can't be met for one reason or another. "We do the best we can, but there is a lot of work that has to be done (when testing evidence) and sometimes it takes longer," she said. "Our lab is very careful about how evidence is handled." The Pennsylvania State Police Bureau of Forensic Services is an ASCLD-LAB Legacy accredited laboratory system. According to the bureau's Web site, its primary mission is to serve the criminal justice community and the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by providing the highest quality scientific, technical and investigative support to law enforcement agencies for the processing of crime-related evidence. It operates a system of seven regional forensic laboratories and one DNA laboratory (with two locations) strategically located throughout the Commonwealth. There are three ASCLD-accredited laboratories in Pennsylvania in addition to the seven PSP labs, according to the American Society of Crime Laboratory Directors Laboratory Accreditation Board Web site. ---------- Vicky Taylor can be reached at 262-4753 or vtaylor at publicopinionnews.com Timeline July 28, 2008: Donald Berkebile dies after fighting with a neighbor, Bryan Kendall, 40, at the side of an access road across Berkebile's Blue Spring Road property in Montgomery Township. Kendall is injured when shot in the chest with birdshot. July 29: Franklin County Coroner Jeff Conner rules the death a homicide, saying Berkebile died of blunt force head and neck trauma. July 30: Pennsylvania State Police announces probe into Berkebile's death. July 31: Police say they are looking into a feud between the two men. Oct. 29-30: Berkebile's personal property, including many antiques, are auctioned off. Early December: Mysterious buyer has the high bid for Berkebile's land and the historic 1770s farm house on it. January 2009: Berkebile property transferred to Timothy N. and Janet M. Martynenko. Sale price listed as $315,000. February: Bryan Kendall and his wife Susan file a civil suit against Berkebile estate, claiming "great humiliation and embarrassment," and "a loss of earnings." February: Franklin County District Attorney's office says the criminal investigation into Berkebile's death is still open, claims a civil suit will not have a bearing on investigation. March: DA's office says it is waiting for key evidence to come back from the state's forensics lab, expects those results in April. May: DA's office says lab results still not back, expects that evidence back by June. August: Evidence still not back. DA 's office expresses frustration, saying it can't make a decision in the case until it gets the lab report. //////////////////////////////////////////// www.justicefordon.info Donald Herbert Berkebile March 1926 - July 2008 About Don Berkebile Related Links Neighbors stunned by shooting over property dispute Shooting leaves one man dead Autopsy: 81-year-old Montgomery Township man died of head, neck injuries Coroner: Blunt force trauma killed man Auction of Pa. man's estate a trip back in time Man sues estate of neighbor who died after fight Kendall Complaint 2/17/09 Response filed to lawsuit against estate of slain Mercersburg man Sludge Fued No decision yet on charges in Pa. death Our view: Due process suffers in Berkebile investigation Crime lab holds up decision in Berkebile death The family of Don Berkebile is heartbroken that it has been over a year since he died and there has been no definitive action taken to resolve the many questions surrounding his death. The photo above was taken just weeks before; an 81 year old man with a heart condition and just recovering from a broken leg. He is so very sadly missed by those who loved him. We have been patiently waiting for answers . . and justice for Don. These are only a few of the questions we have about why we don't know any more today than we did a year ago about the who, why and how Don Berkebile died. What were the circumstances that led to his death that morning? The Coroner of Franklin County has reported that Don died of blunt force trauma to the head and neck. Who is responsible for his death? Why has no one been charged for inflicting these injuries that resulted in his death? Why have the forensics from this case been pending for more than a year? Will the person or persons responsible for his death walk away free, never being held responsible? Don's wishes were that his estate be donated to charities. The distribution of his estate is being held up by litigation related to his death. Due to the delays in this process, how much of his estate will be consumed by legal and administrative fees instead of being distributed to these worthy charities as he intended? Will the passing of time eventually leave this case forgotten and unresolved? If anyone can help move this process forward we will be grateful for the information. We only seek justice for Don; to see that those responsible for his death are held accountable and to know the truth about what really happened that day. Please contact us at Email info at justicefordon.info From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 28 16:21:58 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:21:58 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> California seeks comment on hexavalent chromium in water Message-ID: CALIFORNIA SEEKS COMMENT ON HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM IN WATER http://www.1105newsletters.com/t.do?id=3230737:13757728 "This draft public health goal document is the first in the nation that identifies a health-protective level of chromium 6 in drinking water," said Dr. Joan Denton, director of the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Fri Aug 28 20:21:15 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:21:15 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Nexterra, Andritz Become partners in renewable energy from sludges Message-ID: Nexterra, Andritz Become Partners in Renewable Energy Aug 27, 2009 Nexterra Systems Corp., a supplier of biomass gasification solutions, and Andritz, a customized plants, process technologies, and services company for hydropower, pulp and paper, metals, and other industries, have formed a strategic alliance to market drying solutions that are fuelled by renewable biomass energy. Andritz Separation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Andritz Group, supplies biosolids dryers and separation equipment used extensively in the wastewater treatment market. The company also has a product scope in gasification technologies for biomass but for large scale energy and syngas production. Under the alliance, Nexterra and Andritz will jointly market a suite of biosolids drying solutions that combine certain Nexterra gasification technologies with Andritz biosolids dryers. These solutions will enable municipal wastewater treatment facilities to reduce fuel costs, eliminate dependence on fossil fuels, and lower greenhouse gas emissions. ?This strategic relationship ... provides us with a partner who has a deep understanding and presence within the wastewater treatment market, which we see as a very significant market opportunity for our gasification technology,? said Jonathan Rhone, president and chief executive officer of Nexterra. ?Our vision is to offer municipalities a seamless range of renewable energy solutions for drying biosolids, and eventually for power generation with gas engines.? As part of the first phase of the relationship, the partners will immediately target opportunities where existing biosolids dryers can be retrofitted with biomass gasification technology and will use biomass fuel to replace natural gas as a heating source. The companies also plan to offer a solution for greenfield sites that combines biosolids dryers and gasifiers. From maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca Sun Aug 30 10:45:56 2009 From: maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca (Maureen Reilly) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 10:45:56 -0400 Subject: Sludge Watch ==> Riverkeeper comments on sludge and Florida's Indian River Lagoon Message-ID: Helane Shields: Not only does St. Lucie County accept sludge for land application, it accepts it from most counties to the south, all the way to Miami-Dade, which sends its waste sludge to St. Lucie to be spread on agricultural land. Jones said he would like for the county to stop taking sludge from other counties and eventually halt the practice altogether. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////// http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/aug/29/michael-goforth-riverkeeper-looking-out-for/ Michael Goforth: Riverkeeper looking out for Indian River Lagoon By Michael Goforth Saturday, August 29, 2009 Jones ?I can assure you the problems with the river and its resources will, if not corrected soon, have a very painful and long-term effect on the economy and quality of life in this area. ... Decisions based on political agendas, and the short-term economics of uncontrolled growth have us to the brink of ecological genocide.? That?s part of George L. Jones? response to my column a few weeks ago on the Indian River Lagoon. Like me and many others, Jones has a passion for the health of the lagoon. His passion, however, is also his job. About a year ago, Jones came out of retirement after 34 years, ultimately serving as bureau chief for the state Department of Environmental Protection?s state parks division, to become the Indian River Lagoon Riverkeeper. The Riverkeeper program is a nonprofit citizen advocate organization dedicated to enforcement of the Clean Water Act. As such, Jones is a watchdog and advocate for the health of the Indian River Lagoon and its potential impacts on human health. And, he said in an interview, the health of the lagoon is ?not great right now? and potentially could become much worse. Part of the reason, he said, is that we?ve been looking in the wrong places in trying to improve the quality of the waterway. Public focus has largely been on the massive discharges from Lake Okeechobee, which have been blamed for fish kills, wildlife illnesses and algae blooms. But, he said, most of the ?dirty water? going into the lagoon actually comes regularly from the C-23 and c-24 canals. While there are plans in place to build a reservoir to improve the quality of water coming into those canals, funding has been directed more toward Lake Okeechobee and the cleanup of the Everglades. The South Florida Water Management District, he said, has pushed back the project to clean up the two canals to 2020. And, the pollution keeps pouring in. ?At some point, we going to reach a tipping point and then we can?t get back what we?ll lose,? he said. Jones has also been talking to St. Lucie County officials about concerns for pollution originating on agriculture land. The county, he said, permits land application of sewage sludge from waste treatment plants. While that use can be beneficial to soil and can save farmers from higher costs for fertilizer, major concentrations of phosphorous and nitrogen, the major sources of pollution in the lagoon, are degrading the water quality, which can lead to destruction of seagrasses and other environmental problems. Not only does St. Lucie County accept sludge for land application, it accepts it from most counties to the south, all the way to Miami-Dade, which sends its waste sludge to St. Lucie to be spread on agricultural land. Jones said he would like for the county to stop taking sludge from other counties and eventually halt the practice altogether. ?They?re going to have to stop at some time,? he said. In his e-mail to me, Jones said, ?The public needs to demand better from our political and agency leadership and start using the enforcement laws on the books to force them to do their jobs.? In addition to cajoling and lobbying officials along the Treasure Coast, Jones is attempting to educate the public about what is occurring and what is not occurring in regard to protecting the invaluable resource that is the Indian River Lagoon. With more of the public demanding protection of the water, officials are more likely to take actions needed. The status quo is unacceptable when it comes to the Indian River Lagoon. It?s heartening to know that George Jones knows that and is fighting for the lagoon and for all of those who are directly or indirectly impacted by it. Michael.Goforth at scripps.com