Showing posts with label water pollution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water pollution. Show all posts
Saturday, 5 December 2009
Friday, 14 August 2009
Water, too precious to waste.
Here's my latest submission to the Sheffield Star Green Scene.
In Bermuda every home has built in rainwater harvesting mandated by code as there is no natural source of fresh water. There is also a developing network of water mains provided by a desalinization plant. As this process uses a great deal of electricity, provided by an oil burning power plant, the cost of this water is some incentive to conserve. Many homes have 3 sources of water, a shallow well that provides brackish water for flushing toilets and washing clothes, the rainwater harvesting system used for drinking water, bathing and dishwashing, and the desalinated mains back up for those weeks of dry weather that exhaust the rainwater supply. The long history of relying on the skies for much of their water has contributed to the development of a deep seated water conservation ethic in many Bermudians.
We are not so fortunate as to have mandated rainwater harvesting here in the UK where water usage in the home breaks down as such;
toilet flushing - 33%
washing machines - 21%
baths and showers - 17%
kitchen sink - 16%
wash basin - 9 %
dishwashers - 1%
hosepipes - 3%
and a further 5 to 10% is lost through leaks in the home.
(Harris and Borer 2005 p.279)
From these figures some obvious avenues of conservation are evident. Firstly, why do we flush our toilets with drinking water? We can at least cut down on the number of flushes. In Bermuda there is a saying, “If it’s yellow, let it mellow. If it’s brown, flush it down.” Another simple flush saver is to have an occasional surreptitious garden pee on your compost heap. The extra nitrogen will speed up the composting process and as long as you don’t overdo it the heap won’t smell much different.
In our home we place a collection bucket in the shower to capture the water wasted while waiting for it to get hot. When we step in we push it back against the wall and it continues to collect splash and drip throughout the shower. We then pour this “excess” water into the toilet to flush.
Showers use less water than baths unless you have a power shower. If you have a hot water heater you don’t need a power shower which uses far more water and electricity than is needed. In either case take as short a shower as you can.
Use a bucket in the sink when you wash dishes, you can use this water to flush toilets or to water your lawn. Be sure to use gentle, natural soaps. Avoid antibacterial soaps as they will have a deleterious effect on the soil ecology.
Don’t use hosepipes. If you must wash your car or water your plants use buckets. The simple act of carrying your water will encourage conservation. A running hosepipe can get through an astonishing amount of water, hundreds of litres, in a very short period of time.
Avoid plantings in the garden that are water hungry, if you must water plants use rainwater from a water butt. Rainwater is better for the plants and the soil as it does not contain chlorine.
There are more expensive options for water conservation. If a replacement is needed of a water using device be sure to carefully source lower use options such as low flow shower heads, spray taps, and low use toilet cisterns. An even better solution is a compost toilet which uses no water and produces compost for your fruit trees.
References:
Harris, C. and Borer, P. 1998 - The Whole House Book; Ecological Building Design and Materials 2nd edition,
In Bermuda every home has built in rainwater harvesting mandated by code as there is no natural source of fresh water. There is also a developing network of water mains provided by a desalinization plant. As this process uses a great deal of electricity, provided by an oil burning power plant, the cost of this water is some incentive to conserve. Many homes have 3 sources of water, a shallow well that provides brackish water for flushing toilets and washing clothes, the rainwater harvesting system used for drinking water, bathing and dishwashing, and the desalinated mains back up for those weeks of dry weather that exhaust the rainwater supply. The long history of relying on the skies for much of their water has contributed to the development of a deep seated water conservation ethic in many Bermudians.
We are not so fortunate as to have mandated rainwater harvesting here in the UK where water usage in the home breaks down as such;
toilet flushing - 33%
washing machines - 21%
baths and showers - 17%
kitchen sink - 16%
wash basin - 9 %
dishwashers - 1%
hosepipes - 3%
and a further 5 to 10% is lost through leaks in the home.
(Harris and Borer 2005 p.279)
From these figures some obvious avenues of conservation are evident. Firstly, why do we flush our toilets with drinking water? We can at least cut down on the number of flushes. In Bermuda there is a saying, “If it’s yellow, let it mellow. If it’s brown, flush it down.” Another simple flush saver is to have an occasional surreptitious garden pee on your compost heap. The extra nitrogen will speed up the composting process and as long as you don’t overdo it the heap won’t smell much different.
In our home we place a collection bucket in the shower to capture the water wasted while waiting for it to get hot. When we step in we push it back against the wall and it continues to collect splash and drip throughout the shower. We then pour this “excess” water into the toilet to flush.
Showers use less water than baths unless you have a power shower. If you have a hot water heater you don’t need a power shower which uses far more water and electricity than is needed. In either case take as short a shower as you can.
Use a bucket in the sink when you wash dishes, you can use this water to flush toilets or to water your lawn. Be sure to use gentle, natural soaps. Avoid antibacterial soaps as they will have a deleterious effect on the soil ecology.
Don’t use hosepipes. If you must wash your car or water your plants use buckets. The simple act of carrying your water will encourage conservation. A running hosepipe can get through an astonishing amount of water, hundreds of litres, in a very short period of time.
Avoid plantings in the garden that are water hungry, if you must water plants use rainwater from a water butt. Rainwater is better for the plants and the soil as it does not contain chlorine.
There are more expensive options for water conservation. If a replacement is needed of a water using device be sure to carefully source lower use options such as low flow shower heads, spray taps, and low use toilet cisterns. An even better solution is a compost toilet which uses no water and produces compost for your fruit trees.
References:
Harris, C. and Borer, P. 1998 - The Whole House Book; Ecological Building Design and Materials 2nd edition,
Friday, 3 July 2009
The environmental toll of plastics
How did our grandparents survive without it? Quite well indeed.
Made of petroleum, our food is wrapped in it, the liquids we drink are bottled in it, practically everything we use has some plastic parts, and it is not only killing the oceans it is killing us!
As reported over on Climate Progress;
"From cell phones and computers to bicycle helmets and hospital IV bags, plastic has molded society in many ways that make life both easier and safer. But the synthetic material also has left harmful imprints on the environment and perhaps human health, according to a new compilation of articles authored by scientists from around the world.
More than 60 scientists contributed to the new report, which aims to present the first comprehensive review of the impact of plastics on the environment and human health, and offer possible solutions.
“One of the most ubiquitous and long-lasting recent changes to the surface of our planet is the accumulation and fragmentation of plastics,” wrote David Barnes, a lead author and researcher for the British Antarctic Survey. The report was published this month in a theme issue of Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B, a scientific journal….
“Plastics are very long-lived products that could potentially have service over decades, and yet our main use of these lightweight, inexpensive materials are as single-use items that will go to the garbage dump within a year, where they’ll persist for centuries,” Richard Thompson, lead editor of the report, said in an interview.
Evidence is mounting that the chemical building blocks that make plastics so versatile are the same components that might harm people and the environment. And its production and disposal contribute to an array of environmental problems, too. For example:
• Chemicals added to plastics are absorbed by human bodies. Some of these compounds have been found to alter hormones or have other potential human health effects.
• Plastic debris, laced with chemicals and often ingested by marine animals, can injure or poison wildlife.
• Floating plastic waste, which can survive for thousands of years in water, serves as mini transportation devices for invasive species, disrupting habitats.
• Plastic buried deep in landfills can leach harmful chemicals that spread into groundwater.
• Around 4 percent of world oil production is used as a feedstock to make plastics, and a similar amount is consumed as energy in the process.
People are exposed to chemicals from plastic multiple times per day through the air, dust, water, food and use of consumer products.
For example, phthalates are used as plasticizers in the manufacture of vinyl flooring and wall coverings, food packaging and medical devices. Eight out of every ten babies, and nearly all adults, have measurable levels of phthalates in their bodies.
In addition, bisphenol A (BPA), found in polycarbonate bottles and the linings of food and beverage cans, can leach into food and drinks. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 93 percent of people had detectable levels of BPA in their urine.
The report noted that the high exposure of premature infants in neonatal intensive care units to both BPA and phthalates is of “great concern”….
“We have animal literature, which shows direct links between exposure and adverse health outcomes, the limited human studies, and the fact that 90 to 100 percent of the population has measurable levels of these compounds in their bodies,” said John Meeker, an assistant professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Michigan School of Public Health and a lead author. “You take the whole picture and it does raise concerns, but more research is needed.”
Shanna Swan, director of the University of Rochester’s Center for Reproductive Epidemiology, conducted studies that found an association between pregnant women’s exposure to phthalates and altered genital development in their baby boys.
Also, people with the highest exposure to BPA have an increased rate of heart disease and diabetes, according to one recent study. Animal tests studies of PBDEs have revealed the potential for damaging the developing brain and the reproductive system."
Made of petroleum, our food is wrapped in it, the liquids we drink are bottled in it, practically everything we use has some plastic parts, and it is not only killing the oceans it is killing us!
As reported over on Climate Progress;
"From cell phones and computers to bicycle helmets and hospital IV bags, plastic has molded society in many ways that make life both easier and safer. But the synthetic material also has left harmful imprints on the environment and perhaps human health, according to a new compilation of articles authored by scientists from around the world.
More than 60 scientists contributed to the new report, which aims to present the first comprehensive review of the impact of plastics on the environment and human health, and offer possible solutions.
“One of the most ubiquitous and long-lasting recent changes to the surface of our planet is the accumulation and fragmentation of plastics,” wrote David Barnes, a lead author and researcher for the British Antarctic Survey. The report was published this month in a theme issue of Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B, a scientific journal….
“Plastics are very long-lived products that could potentially have service over decades, and yet our main use of these lightweight, inexpensive materials are as single-use items that will go to the garbage dump within a year, where they’ll persist for centuries,” Richard Thompson, lead editor of the report, said in an interview.
Evidence is mounting that the chemical building blocks that make plastics so versatile are the same components that might harm people and the environment. And its production and disposal contribute to an array of environmental problems, too. For example:
• Chemicals added to plastics are absorbed by human bodies. Some of these compounds have been found to alter hormones or have other potential human health effects.
• Plastic debris, laced with chemicals and often ingested by marine animals, can injure or poison wildlife.
• Floating plastic waste, which can survive for thousands of years in water, serves as mini transportation devices for invasive species, disrupting habitats.
• Plastic buried deep in landfills can leach harmful chemicals that spread into groundwater.
• Around 4 percent of world oil production is used as a feedstock to make plastics, and a similar amount is consumed as energy in the process.
People are exposed to chemicals from plastic multiple times per day through the air, dust, water, food and use of consumer products.
For example, phthalates are used as plasticizers in the manufacture of vinyl flooring and wall coverings, food packaging and medical devices. Eight out of every ten babies, and nearly all adults, have measurable levels of phthalates in their bodies.
In addition, bisphenol A (BPA), found in polycarbonate bottles and the linings of food and beverage cans, can leach into food and drinks. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 93 percent of people had detectable levels of BPA in their urine.
The report noted that the high exposure of premature infants in neonatal intensive care units to both BPA and phthalates is of “great concern”….
“We have animal literature, which shows direct links between exposure and adverse health outcomes, the limited human studies, and the fact that 90 to 100 percent of the population has measurable levels of these compounds in their bodies,” said John Meeker, an assistant professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Michigan School of Public Health and a lead author. “You take the whole picture and it does raise concerns, but more research is needed.”
Shanna Swan, director of the University of Rochester’s Center for Reproductive Epidemiology, conducted studies that found an association between pregnant women’s exposure to phthalates and altered genital development in their baby boys.
Also, people with the highest exposure to BPA have an increased rate of heart disease and diabetes, according to one recent study. Animal tests studies of PBDEs have revealed the potential for damaging the developing brain and the reproductive system."
Saturday, 27 June 2009
A loo made of poo makes energy for you
Continuing the theme of respecting water that I laid out in my previous post "Some thoughts about water". Thanks to Worldchanging for the heads up on this innovative design.
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Tar Sands oil crimes video part 1
As oil companies ride rough shod over the environment of Alberta in a rush to extract profit from the earth they are destroying carbon sequestering arboreal forest ecosystems, creating huge toxic tailing ponds, leaving a legacy of cancer in the local communities through the toxification of the Athabasca river, and burning enough natural gas/day to heat 3 million Canadian homes. And who are they doing this for? American drivers, who else.
Monday, 25 February 2008
Corn ethanol and Water in the US Part 5 - by Robb
In this discussion on living sustainably I have already mentioned food as a basic need. My next post will begin to look at food in more detail but for now let me wrap up this thread on corn ethanol with a move from it’s water implications to it’s impacts on food production.
Corn is Food
Of the total 93 million acres planted in corn in 2007, approximately 23 million acres were devoted to ethanol. (Food and Water Watch2007) 70 million acres of corn were used directly or indirectly for food production. The 2006 US output of ethanol was 6.5 billion gallons. (Platts 2007) The Congressional Research Service has stated:
“barring drastic realignment of US field crop production patterns, corn based ethanol’s potential as a petroleum import substitute appears to be limited by a crop area constraint.”
Tell the Bush administration because the US Dept of Energy and the US Dept of Agriculture have decided that the US has the land resources capable of producing 1.3 billion tons of biomass/yr by 2030 and that only 1 billion tons would be needed to displace 30% of the country’s oil use based on 2004 rates. Even the NRDC has gotten on board. The Natural Resources Defense Council reckons that biofuels could offset 25% of projected US transport oil consumption by 2050. (Food and Water Watch2007)
But what will be the effect on food prices? Ethanol production already has a deleterious effect on the poor who rely on the corn crop as a staple. Corn prices in Mexico rose 400% just 3 months resulting in civil unrest in Mexico in early 2007. (Jerome Taylor in “The World” 2007)
“David Pimentel,... has calculated that powering the average U.S. automobile for one year on ethanol (blended with gasoline) derived from corn would require 11 acres of farmland, the same space needed to grow a year's supply of food for seven people.” (Roger Segelken 2008)
It should be noted that Mr. Pimentel’s work on this issue has been called into question due to his research associate, Tad Patzek’s connections with the oil industry. More recent research is supporting his conclusions however.
Conclusions
The profligacy of the US extends beyond their driving habits; water use in the US is the highest in the world. According to the WWF report “Rich Countries, Poor Water”:
“In the USA, large areas are already using substantially more water than can be naturally replenished. This situation will only be further exacerbated by climate change scenarios of lower rainfall, increased evaporation and changed snow-melt patterns. Salinity threatens important irrigation areas and there is increasing anxiety over the level of contamination with chemicals and pathogens in water sources and water supplies.”
Ground and surface water pollution has resulted in an ecological catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico and poisoned drinking water across the corn belt. The environment of the US cannot support a large scale expansion of the corn industry; indeed if anything it should be scaled back to a level that is achievable through sustainable and ecologically sound practices. There is not enough water, not enough arable land, and not enough GHG emissions reduction to be gained from an expanded corn to ethanol industry. If the subsidies currently going to support corn ethanol production, $7 billion in 2007, were instead shifted to the auto industry to help them rapidly achieve at least a doubling in CAFE standards, a much more substantive reduction in GHG emissions could be realized.
Committing to a large scale shift to corn based ethanol as a fuel for transportation in the US is a business as usual solution that threatens water quality and availability as well as making food even more unaffordable for the worlds poor. Further, cultivation of food crops for fuel means that more land will have to be converted into food crop production, whether it be rainforest, temperate wildlife habitat, or drained swampland. There is mounting evidence that this process has grave implications on GHG emissions as mature diverse wild lands tend to sequester carbon and their conversion to crop lands releases huge quantities of carbon into the atmosphere as well as methane.
I think we face a choice, would we rather eat, drink, and breath or drive an SUV?
Corn is Food
Of the total 93 million acres planted in corn in 2007, approximately 23 million acres were devoted to ethanol. (Food and Water Watch2007) 70 million acres of corn were used directly or indirectly for food production. The 2006 US output of ethanol was 6.5 billion gallons. (Platts 2007) The Congressional Research Service has stated:
“barring drastic realignment of US field crop production patterns, corn based ethanol’s potential as a petroleum import substitute appears to be limited by a crop area constraint.”
Tell the Bush administration because the US Dept of Energy and the US Dept of Agriculture have decided that the US has the land resources capable of producing 1.3 billion tons of biomass/yr by 2030 and that only 1 billion tons would be needed to displace 30% of the country’s oil use based on 2004 rates. Even the NRDC has gotten on board. The Natural Resources Defense Council reckons that biofuels could offset 25% of projected US transport oil consumption by 2050. (Food and Water Watch2007)
But what will be the effect on food prices? Ethanol production already has a deleterious effect on the poor who rely on the corn crop as a staple. Corn prices in Mexico rose 400% just 3 months resulting in civil unrest in Mexico in early 2007. (Jerome Taylor in “The World” 2007)
“David Pimentel,... has calculated that powering the average U.S. automobile for one year on ethanol (blended with gasoline) derived from corn would require 11 acres of farmland, the same space needed to grow a year's supply of food for seven people.” (Roger Segelken 2008)
It should be noted that Mr. Pimentel’s work on this issue has been called into question due to his research associate, Tad Patzek’s connections with the oil industry. More recent research is supporting his conclusions however.
Conclusions
The profligacy of the US extends beyond their driving habits; water use in the US is the highest in the world. According to the WWF report “Rich Countries, Poor Water”:
“In the USA, large areas are already using substantially more water than can be naturally replenished. This situation will only be further exacerbated by climate change scenarios of lower rainfall, increased evaporation and changed snow-melt patterns. Salinity threatens important irrigation areas and there is increasing anxiety over the level of contamination with chemicals and pathogens in water sources and water supplies.”
Ground and surface water pollution has resulted in an ecological catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico and poisoned drinking water across the corn belt. The environment of the US cannot support a large scale expansion of the corn industry; indeed if anything it should be scaled back to a level that is achievable through sustainable and ecologically sound practices. There is not enough water, not enough arable land, and not enough GHG emissions reduction to be gained from an expanded corn to ethanol industry. If the subsidies currently going to support corn ethanol production, $7 billion in 2007, were instead shifted to the auto industry to help them rapidly achieve at least a doubling in CAFE standards, a much more substantive reduction in GHG emissions could be realized.
Committing to a large scale shift to corn based ethanol as a fuel for transportation in the US is a business as usual solution that threatens water quality and availability as well as making food even more unaffordable for the worlds poor. Further, cultivation of food crops for fuel means that more land will have to be converted into food crop production, whether it be rainforest, temperate wildlife habitat, or drained swampland. There is mounting evidence that this process has grave implications on GHG emissions as mature diverse wild lands tend to sequester carbon and their conversion to crop lands releases huge quantities of carbon into the atmosphere as well as methane.
I think we face a choice, would we rather eat, drink, and breath or drive an SUV?
Sunday, 17 February 2008
What's truly needed? some details - by Robb
“That all people should have free access to air and water of acceptable quality is a fundamental human right.” (WHO 2000)
I’d like to spend several posts examining water to start with.
Clean fresh water is the most precious of resources. Second only to fresh air to breath.
Overview of current global water situation
Worldwide use of freshwater has grown at the twice the population rate of increase in the last 100 years. 1.8 billion people will be living in a condition of absolute water scarcity by 2025. For most of the world, agriculture is both the largest and most important consumer of water accounting for 70% of all water use globally. (UN Water Thematic Initiatives 2006)
“It is suggested that an additional 5,600 km3/yr of consumptive water use will be needed to produce an adequate amount of food by 2050 - i.e. almost a doubling of today’s consumptive use of 6800 km3/yr........Expanded irrigation can only solve part of the problem. Already today, there is a large scale overappropriation of river flow over 15% of the land area (Smathkin et al., 2004). In addition there is a huge overuse of groundwater beyond renewable rate......The present irrigation system is.......not sustainable.” (Falkenmark 2006)
Fully one quarter of groundwater withdrawal is not sustainable according to The Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. While 1.1 billion of the world’s people lack access to improved water supplies, 2.6 billion lack access to to improved sanitation. (UN World Water Assessment Program 2006)
“Irrigation agriculture, responsible for nearly 40% of world food production, uses about 70% of total water withdrawals.” (United Nations Economic and Social Council 1997)
In the next 30 years approximately 14% more freshwater will be needed by agriculture just to keep pace with the growing demand for food. (UN Water Thematic Initiatives 2006)
Water pollution
We are not only using too much water but we’re abusing it as well. The most common contaminants found in water, after salt, are agricultural chemicals. Just looking at one of the primary staple food crops, corn, is instructive. Corn production in the US involves vast quantities of commercial nitrogen, applied to 98% of corn fields, and commercial phospate, applied to 87% of corn fields.(USDA Economic Research Service 2002) That’s 91.73 million acres or approximately 1.5 times the entire land mass of the UK sprayed with commercial nitrogen in 2007 if the rate remained the same. Both those chemicals are eutrophying agents. They stimulate the growth of microorganisms which use up all the oxygen in the water and thus everything else either leaves, if it can, or dies. The Gulf of Mexico has a large and growing deadzone, currently 6600 square miles in size, largely a result of corporate agricultural and industrial practices resulting in polluted runoff into the Mississippi river. (Food and Water Watch 2007)
Also widely used on the the US corn crop, is atrazine, one of the most widely used herbicides on earth, a known carcinogen and banned in the EU.
“The EPA acknowledges that ‘there is significant, widespread exposure to atrazine and it’s metabolites in drinking water’ and warns that exposure to atrazine can cause ‘congestion of the heart, lungs and kidneys;low blood pressure;muscle spasms;weight loss, and damage to adrenal glands....... cardiovascular damage, retinal and some muscle degeneration and cancer’” (US EPA 2006)
The EPA under the Clinton administration found that 43% of the 1million lbs/yr of chemicals produced or imported in the US have no basic toxicity data with only 7% having undergone full basic toxicity testing. One such chemical, perchlorate, a chemical used in the defense industry is showing up in groundwater.
“About 20 million Americans have rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate present as a contaminant in their tap water. No safe level has been established for the chemical which can disrupt thyroid function and cause cancer.” (WWF Freshwater Program 2006)
This is scary stuff and I’ll pause here. Next post I’ll talk about virtual water which begins to tie in water use with sustainable living.
I’d like to spend several posts examining water to start with.
Clean fresh water is the most precious of resources. Second only to fresh air to breath.
Overview of current global water situation
Worldwide use of freshwater has grown at the twice the population rate of increase in the last 100 years. 1.8 billion people will be living in a condition of absolute water scarcity by 2025. For most of the world, agriculture is both the largest and most important consumer of water accounting for 70% of all water use globally. (UN Water Thematic Initiatives 2006)
“It is suggested that an additional 5,600 km3/yr of consumptive water use will be needed to produce an adequate amount of food by 2050 - i.e. almost a doubling of today’s consumptive use of 6800 km3/yr........Expanded irrigation can only solve part of the problem. Already today, there is a large scale overappropriation of river flow over 15% of the land area (Smathkin et al., 2004). In addition there is a huge overuse of groundwater beyond renewable rate......The present irrigation system is.......not sustainable.” (Falkenmark 2006)
Fully one quarter of groundwater withdrawal is not sustainable according to The Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. While 1.1 billion of the world’s people lack access to improved water supplies, 2.6 billion lack access to to improved sanitation. (UN World Water Assessment Program 2006)
“Irrigation agriculture, responsible for nearly 40% of world food production, uses about 70% of total water withdrawals.” (United Nations Economic and Social Council 1997)
In the next 30 years approximately 14% more freshwater will be needed by agriculture just to keep pace with the growing demand for food. (UN Water Thematic Initiatives 2006)
Water pollution
We are not only using too much water but we’re abusing it as well. The most common contaminants found in water, after salt, are agricultural chemicals. Just looking at one of the primary staple food crops, corn, is instructive. Corn production in the US involves vast quantities of commercial nitrogen, applied to 98% of corn fields, and commercial phospate, applied to 87% of corn fields.(USDA Economic Research Service 2002) That’s 91.73 million acres or approximately 1.5 times the entire land mass of the UK sprayed with commercial nitrogen in 2007 if the rate remained the same. Both those chemicals are eutrophying agents. They stimulate the growth of microorganisms which use up all the oxygen in the water and thus everything else either leaves, if it can, or dies. The Gulf of Mexico has a large and growing deadzone, currently 6600 square miles in size, largely a result of corporate agricultural and industrial practices resulting in polluted runoff into the Mississippi river. (Food and Water Watch 2007)
Also widely used on the the US corn crop, is atrazine, one of the most widely used herbicides on earth, a known carcinogen and banned in the EU.
“The EPA acknowledges that ‘there is significant, widespread exposure to atrazine and it’s metabolites in drinking water’ and warns that exposure to atrazine can cause ‘congestion of the heart, lungs and kidneys;low blood pressure;muscle spasms;weight loss, and damage to adrenal glands....... cardiovascular damage, retinal and some muscle degeneration and cancer’” (US EPA 2006)
The EPA under the Clinton administration found that 43% of the 1million lbs/yr of chemicals produced or imported in the US have no basic toxicity data with only 7% having undergone full basic toxicity testing. One such chemical, perchlorate, a chemical used in the defense industry is showing up in groundwater.
“About 20 million Americans have rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate present as a contaminant in their tap water. No safe level has been established for the chemical which can disrupt thyroid function and cause cancer.” (WWF Freshwater Program 2006)
This is scary stuff and I’ll pause here. Next post I’ll talk about virtual water which begins to tie in water use with sustainable living.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
.jpg)
