Don’t Have to Sacrifice
What you drink?
Years ago, I was employed by a Houston contracting company that specialized in underground utilities and water/waste water treatment plants.
When it came time to “bid” on a job, a company representative would carry the polished proposal along with a walkie-talkie down to City Hall, where the bidding commenced. On occasion, I went along.
About a week before this day, the energy throughout the office was palpable. Imagine some combination of a college freshman preparing forrush week and a political consultant working “the war room” on election night. The key words here are “rush” and “war.” By the day of the bidding, it felt like riding atop a fast-moving freight train.
I cannot tell you one knowledgeable fact as to the specific details in these proposals, nor can I speak any more intelligently as to exactly how or why a company is awarded the job.
I can, however, tell you one thing based on my limited experience: Water is all about politics, pure and simple. Well, maybe not so pure.
I’m reminded of this water business because of two recent investigative reports broken by KHOU reporter Mark Greenblatt on TV and khou.com.
The first article online, posted December 23, 2010, opens with this:
A radioactive water well that is controlled by the City of Houston, and that serves residents of Jersey Village, is no longer being used, according to the communications director for Houston Mayor Annise Parker. A KHOU-TV investigation revealed Jersey Village water well #3 was one of ten water wells identified by recent federal tests as having tested high for a particularly damaging form of radiation calledalpha radiation.
‘Twas the season of hurry, I realized, but this was sure news to me!
In addition, the city says it is no longer using Spring Branch water well #6. That well was found to have smaller levels of radiation by the draft USGS [U.S. Geological Survey] report, but not enough to approach the legal limit. Instead, the federal agency found it had tested double the legal limit for arsenic, another carcinogen that can cause cancer and other ill health effects.
Yikes! Granted, I may still have too much Gulf oil spill on the brain, but something sure smells familiar to me. It’s a story that may be bigger than it seems now, involving toxic chemicals and local government (which often, in my view, can make national government look like The Sound of Music).
Truth is, politics abounds. Getting the facts is 99.9 percent of the work.
Earlier this week, city council member and former police chief C.O. “Brad” Bradford criticized city leaders for not doing more, sooner. He reviewed the draft copy of the USGS report, which revealed that radiation was detected in nearly every groundwater well the federal agency tested in Houston. The draft was delivered to city officials in the public works department in September.
SEPTEMBER?
‘Neighborhoods in Houston should be on notice,’ Bradford said. ‘We have a problem with the drinking water and use of water in Houston, Texas.’
Mayor Annise Parker was questioned about all this in a press conference.
MAYOR PARKER: ‘We have a safe water system, and we do not provide unsafe water.
KHOU: You say again the water is ‘safe.’ In your opinion, how much radiation is it safe to drink?
MAYOR PARKER: ‘You know I have no idea what goes into the technical water qualifications of our water system. We follow EPA guidelines.’
Which brings up another important point, and one that I share with a council member.
Other elected leaders, like council memberJolanda Jones, don’t think those EPA guidelines go far enough. She recently spoke to concerned residents of Houston’s Chasewood neighborhood, who were exposed to many years’ worth of radioactive water from a city water well that consistently tested higher than the EPA legal limit for alpha radiation.
Equally as troubling to me was the paragraph that followed. As the saying goes, “The devil’s in the details.”
However, because water wells in other neighborhoods in Houston are served by wells with less radiation, Houston’s water supply as an entire ‘system’ stayed in compliance with federal regulations. As a result, Chasewood residents were never warned of what Jones calls a real danger to their neighborhood.
Now, I ain’t no Dudley Do-Right, but does this sound like the golden rule or just plain common sense to you?
In a second article posted on January 7, 2011, Greenblatt opens with a meeting of the water committee of Houston’s City Council. If you’re living in the City of Houston, I recommend you take a read.
The fact that the powers that be are at least gathering and attempting to deal with the problem does sound encouraging, but while I’m no engineer or elected official, it sure seems like there’s room for improvement. Not just with our water quality, but with how we respond to these problems — not as politicians or elected officials, but first, as citizens.
So who’s the hero in all this? In my book, it’s KHOU investigative reporterMark Greenblatt.
Interestingly, last year the City of Houston laid a new water line down our street. Since then, my skin has felt like that of an elephant’s and my hair’s gone limp and turned brittle. Our bath towels feel like paper towels. No joke.
How Safe Is Your Bottled Water?
Save and use your refillable source - 5 Stage Reverse Osmosis!
Most water bottles are composed of a plastic called polyethylene terepthalate (PET). Now, to make PET, you need crude oil. Specifically, 17 million barrels of oil are used in the production of PET water bottles ever year, estimate University of Louisville scientists. No wonder the per ounce cost of bottled water rivals that of gasoline. What’s more, 86 percent of 30 billion PET water bottles sold annually are tossed in the trash, instead of being recycled, according to data from the Container Recycling Institute. That’s a lot of waste—waste that will outlive you, your children, and your children’s children. You see, PET bottles take 400 to 1000 years to degrade. Which begs the question: If our current rate of consumption continues, where will we put all of this discarded plastic?
Save Money on EVERYDAY cleaning with Soft Water!!!
Studies Show Washing with Softened Water Can Significantly Cut Detergent Use, Energy Consumption
Clothes cleaned at 40 degrees lower, dishes washed with much less soap
PR Newswire
LISLE, Ill., March 1, 2011 /PRNewswire/ — Consumers can cut back on dish and laundry detergent use by 50 percent or more and lower washing machine temperatures from hot to cold just by using softened water, two new independent studies revealed today show.
“The benefits of softened water in people’s daily lives are significant,” said Peter Censky, executive director of the Water Quality Association. “These studies show how consumers can save money and energy by softening their water.”
The detergent savings studies, conducted by the independent testing firm Scientific Services S/D of New York and funded by the Water Quality Research Foundation (WQRF), reveal that using softened water:
- In washing machines, detergent use can be reduced by 50 percent and energy saved by washing in 60 degree F cold water instead of 100 degree F hot water, achieving the same or better stain removal and whiter clothes compared to results in hard water.
- In dishwashers, areas with very hard water can cut detergent use by more than 50 percent after softening and get the same results.
The results show that softened water might not only save consumers money but could also be environmentally friendly, Censky said. They can reduce reliance on polluting fuels because of energy savings and help cut back on harmful detergents going into water streams. Censky emphasized that these environmental benefits, however, are not quantified in the studies.
Researchers used varying levels of hardness and several different name brand detergents in washing machines and dishwashers. It was found that significant savings was noted for all levels of hardness, even hardness as low as 5 grains per gallon.
The laundry study looked at stain removal, putting into the machines from half to the entire amount of manufacturers’ recommended levels. Water hardness ranged from none to 30 gpg, and wash temperature was 60, 80 and 100 degree F. It was found that using softer water is better at removing stains than increased water temperature or more detergent being used.
Notably, softened water with the least amount of detergent and lowest temperature actually provide a higher degree of whiteness compared to increased hardness and both high temperature and large amounts of detergent. This was found to be true for all stains and all the detergents tested.
“Better performance and savings can be achieved with softened water,” the report’s authors conclude.
The dishwasher study included tests that removed difficult soils, in addition to evaluating spotting and filming. Researchers found that softened water using almost 30 percent less detergent cleans as well as water at a 10 gpg (grains per gallon) hardness level. That detergent savings rises to nearly 70 percent when comparing softened water with water at a 25 gpg level.
In dishwashers, the relationship between detergent and hardness was investigated with two consecutive wash-dry cycles for spot and film. One detergent was evaluated for five cycles to ensure that effects do not change with increased number of cycles.
The study also states that air drying as a way to save electrical energy was evaluated and is promising to provide better results when softened water is used rather than hard water.
The detergent savings studies follow research last year that looked at the energy savings that softened water provides when used in water heaters. According to WQRF funded testing conducted in 2009 by the Battelle Institute:
- Gas storage tank household water heaters operated on softened water maintained the original factory efficiency rating over a 15 year lifetime – versus as much as a 48% loss of efficiency in those operated with hard water.
- Indoor instantaneous gas water heaters (tankless heaters) operated on softened water maintained the original factory efficiency rating over a 15 year lifetime. Tank-less water heaters operating on hard water failed after 19 days of testing.
Read more: Studies Show Washing with Softened Water Can Significantly Cut Detergent Use, Energy Consumption
What is reverse osmosis?
Reverse osmosis is one of those things you hear mentioned all the time, but you’re just not really sure what it is. Maybe you remember something about osmosis from science class… but you can’t quite remember all the details. Is that the same thing? Does not sound like it would be. So what is reverse osmosis exactly?
In short, reverse osmosis is a process utilized in many water filtration systems to remove unwanted elements. The process is not unlike straining your macaroni with a sieve, except that in reverse osmosis the unwanted elements are retained while the wantedelement passes through. (The sieve retains your macaroni and lets the unwanted water pass through.)
Osmosis is familiar to most of us. Picture a soaking wet sponge. You place it next to a dry cloth and the water seems to escape the wet sponge and travel over to the rag. This is because water naturally flows from an area of high pressure to one of lower pressure.
Reverse osmosis does the opposite. Makes sense, doesn’t it? It does this by basically creating a pressure imbalance. The unwanted elements are forced by this pressure imbalance through a permeable membrane where they are, in a sense, captured. The clean water is then free to continue on through the system.
Reverse osmosis for water treatment was developed almost 50 years ago as a way to desalinate water. In recent decades, as more and more people have become concerned about the quality of their drinking water, reverse osmosis has been adapted to home filtration of water. Reverse osmosis can remove many elements from iron to calcium to salt to the ubiquitous fluoride.
Reverse osmosis has become one of the most popular methods of water filtration because of its affordability and efficiency. The units are also often highly manageable in terms of size and can be used under sinks or even as adaptor units in freezer/refrigerators for an ice cube system. Many people refer to the taste of reverse osmosis water as cleaner. A good reverse osmosis system can remove as much as 90% of the sodium in your water supply— a huge health consideration for many people.
Houston’s Water Harmful: Contaminated with Radioactive Elements!!
HOUSTON– The City of Houston is one of the only major cities in Texas with radioactive elements, like uranium and radium, present in its drinking water, according to data provided by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and internal City of Houston e-mails.
The elements, which emit something known as alpha radiation, are not present in detectable amounts in Dallas, Arlington, Austin, Beaumont, San Antonio, or many other major cities in Texas.
Small amounts of radioactive elements have contaminated Houston’s water supply going back for as many years as the city keeps records on hand, which is presently for tests performed as far back as 1996. The problem appears to be isolated to the city’s groundwater wells, which provide more than 70 million gallons a day of drinking water for Houston. Some neighborhoods in Houston depend entirely on groundwater wells, while the majority of the city depends on water that is a mixture of surface water and groundwater.
Surface water sources, which include rivers and lakes, have not been found to contain radiation. City officials say the “mix,” the majority of Houston depends on, delivers about 81 percent surface water and 19 percent groundwater on average.
The Department of Public Works says it has records of 78 water samples, collected by state officials since 2004, for regulatory purposes. The four samples that came from surface water sources were “non-detect” for radiation. However, the vast majority of ground wells contained at least some alpha radiation. Six of the 78 samples contained so much they were “above the 15 (picocuries per liter)” legal limit set by the EPA for alpha radiation in water.
KHOU has learned the United States Geological Survey, a federal agency that does not regulate contaminants in drinking water (but assists in determining potential geological conditions that lead to contamination), has been conducting its own study of radiation in Houston’s water. The results of that study have not yet been made public, but internal e-mails written between public works employees suggest the federal study may have detected a much larger share of Houston wells testing above the federal legal limits for radiation, compared to what state regulators found. One e-mail, written on Oct. 12th 2010 from one public works employee to top staff members of the water-quality division, says that the USGS study found “10 out of 68 wells contain alpha particles higher than or equal to (the federal legal limit).”
Dr. Joshua Hamilton, a toxicologist who has a specialty in drinking water, says there is no safe amount of alpha radiation, even if the radiation is below that federal legal limit.
“This particle is highly energized, and it’s coming in at high velocity. If DNA is in its path it will basically attack the DNA,” he said.
Hamilton is the Chief Academic and Scientific Officer at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Massachusetts and he received his PhD from Cornell University in New York. He previously taught as a professor with tenure at Dartmouth Medical College, and has been a visiting scientist at Harvard. He was also the director of the Center for Environmental Health Sciences at Dartmouth.
Hamilton says attacks on your DNA by any amount of alpha radiation can lead to mutations, which can produce “wild cells.” The EPA has stated in its 2000 rule for regulating radiation in water that, “a single ‘‘wild’’ cell can give rise to a cancer. For alpha particles, it has been shown experimentally that a single alpha passing through a cell is sufficient to induce a mutational event.”
Hamilton says that is why the federally-recognized ‘public health goal’ (called a Maximum Contaminant Limit Goal) is “zero” for alpha radiation. That number is set by the Environmental Protection Agency and is listed in the federal register of the United States government. The reason for the goal is because alpha radiation is a known “class A” carcinogen.
The “legal” limit for radiation (called a Maximum Contaminant Limit), however, is set above zero and at various limits depending on what radioactive element is present in the water. Hamilton says your risks still increase for cancer when any amount is present, even if the amount is below the “legal” limit or if your water utility tells you they still meet all “legal” standards.
“One alpha particle, if it hits DNA in the right place, can cause a change which leads to a mutation,” he says. “Every increase in hits increases the likelihood that one of those will cause a mutation that leads to cancer.”
Finish the article here:
http://www.khou.com/news/Radiation-in-Houstons-tap-water–Long-history-of-contamination-108307474.html
Houston Drinking Water, Safe or Not?
HOUSTON — Hundreds of water providers around the Gulf Coast region are providing drinking water to customers that contain radioactive contaminants that raise health risks, according to state lab results and public health scientists.
The revelations came to light during a four-month KHOU-TV investigation, which examined thousands of state laboratory tests from water providers across Texas. The data, provided by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), ranged from 2004 to the present.
The radiation was first discovered as a part of required testing, under federal regulations, of all drinking water provided by community water systems in America.
Click here to check radiation levels in your water system.
In Texas, The Department of State Health Services provides an independent lab to test the water for potential contaminants of all kinds and forwards results to both the water system and to TCEQ. Much to the surprise of many people, hundreds of water companies along the Gulf Coast and all across Texas pump water with some amount of radiation inside.
One particular type of radiation that popped up again and again, in water provided by utilities all across Texas, was something called alpha radiation, which public health scientists say can be particularly problematic when consumed.
“The alpha particle — this is the 800-pound gorilla of radioactive particles,” said Dr. David Ozonoff, an environmental health professor and the chair emeritus of the Boston University School of Public Health.
Ozonoff obtained a medical degree from the Cornell University School of Medicine and serves on the Massachusetts Cancer Advisory Committee.
He said drinking water with any amount of alpha particles, even when consumed in amounts below federal legal limits, raises your risk to develop health problems or, in rare cases, cancer. Examples of alpha particles found in the Gulf Coast region are those from uranium, radium, and other minerals.
Ozonoff describes alpha particles as a type of radiation that would not typically harm you unless inhaled or ingested. He warns, once you take it inside your body, your health risks immediately begin to rise.
“It can’t penetrate very far, but when it hits something it does a ferocious amount of damage,” he said. “If I were to drink it, then many parts of your body are within knife-wielding distance of an alpha particle.”
Ozonoff said the danger in drinking alpha particles is that you bring them inside your body and right up against sensitive organs, where the alpha particles can damage DNA and create a possible mutation in your cells. He says the more you drink, the more you raise your risk for cancer.
In fact, even the EPA says “a single ‘‘wild’’ cell can give rise to a cancer” and that for alpha “a single alpha passing through a cell is sufficient to induce a mutational event.”
The EPA made the disclosure in the federal register as part of the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations 2000 final rule that regulates all forms of radioactive elements in drinking water.
The “zero threshold” allowance for radionuclides, from a health based standard, is one reason why the EPA set the drinking water federal health goal, called the MCLG (Maximum Contaminant Limit Goal) at zero for all forms of ionizing radiation. Other potential contaminants in drinking water such as copper, selenium, barium, chlorine residuals, trihalomethanes, and many others that are not radioactive elements, all have “goals” set above zero.
The EPA notes there are some who disagree with its conclusion that any amount of radiation has the ability to cause a mutation. However, it states in the federal register that EPA “believes its position is based on weight of evidence and support from national and international groups of experts interested in radiation protection.”
Many of America’s largest water systems attain the public health goal with no detectable amounts of radiation in their water supplies. Many, but not all of these water systems, depend on surface drinking water sources like rivers, lakes and streams to supply their communities. Most radioactive alpha particles end up in drinking water only after it is pumped up from groundwater wells in regions of the country with natural uranium, radium, or other radioactive deposits underground. In some cases, that are less common, radioactive elements do end up in surface water.
However, the EPA sets a “legal” limit for these contaminants above zero, which it calls the MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level). The government cannot force a water system to take action to clean up radioactive drinking water until the system exceeds that legal limit. However, as it pertains to radioactive materials in particular, Ozonoff says you are still put at risk if they are present, even in quantities below that legal limit.
“All you need is one cell to go bad,” he said, to initiate the beginning stages of a cancerous event.
Houston’s Water Epidemic – U.S.’s 6th Worst
National Drinking Water Database – Home
Over 300 Pollutants in U.S. Tap Water
Since 2004, testing by water utilities has found 315 pollutants in the tap water Americans drink, according to an Environmental Working Group (EWG) drinking water quality analysis of almost 20 million records obtained from state water officials.
More than half of the chemicals detected are not subject to health or safety regulations and can legally be present in any amount. The federal government does have health guidelines for others, but 49 of these contaminants have been found in one place or another at levels above those guidelines, polluting the tap water for 53.6 million Americans. The government has not set a single new drinking water standard since 2001.
Water utilities spend 19 times more on water treatment chemicals every year than the federal government invests in protecting lakes and rivers from pollution in the first place.
Based on these data, EWG believes the federal government has a responsibility to do a national assessment of drinking water quality. It should establish new safety standards, set priorities for pollution prevention projects, and tell consumers about the full range of pollutants in their water.
Because it has not, EWG launched a 3-year project to create the largest drinking water quality database in existence. This user-friendly, interactive resource covers 48,000 communities in 45 states and the District of Columbia.
Cities with the Best Water
EWG rated big city (population over 250,000) water utilities based on three factors: the total number of chemicals detected since 2004; the percentage of chemicals found of those tested; and the highest average level for an individual pollutant, relative to legal limits or national average amounts, including for the most common pollutants (disinfection byproducts, nitrate and arsenic). [read more on rating methodology]
EWG’s Top-Rated and Lowest-Rated Water Utilities
| TOP RATED WATER UTILITIES | LOWEST RATED WATER UTILITIES | ||
|
1
|
Arlington, TX Arlington Water Utilities |
100
|
Pensacola, FL Emerald Coast Water Utility |
|
2
|
Providence, RI Providence Water |
99
|
Riverside, CA City of Riverside Public Utilities |
|
3
|
Fort Worth, TX Fort Worth Water Department |
98
|
Las Vegas, NV Las Vegas Valley Water District |
|
4
|
Charleston, SC Charleston Water System |
97
|
Riverside County, CA Eastern Municipal Water District |
|
5
|
Boston, MA Massachusetts Water Resources Authority |
96
|
Reno, NV Truckee Meadows Water Authority |
|
6
|
Honolulu, HI Board of Water Supply (Honolulu/Windward/Pearl Harbor) |
95
|
Houston, TX City of Houston Public Works |
|
7
|
Austin, TX Austin Water Utility |
94
|
Omaha, NE Metropolitan Utilities District |
|
8
|
Fairfax County, VA Fairfax Water |
93
|
North Las Vegas, NV City of North Las Vegas Utilities Department |
|
9
|
St. Louis, MO City of St. Louis Water Division |
92
|
San Diego, CA San Diego Water Department |
|
10
|
Minneapolis, MN City of Minneapolis Water Department |
91
|
Jacksonville, FL JEA |
Drinking Water Safety & Ensuring a Healthy Pregnancy
Drinking plenty of water is important enough for humans under normal circumstances; it’s doubly important during pregnancy. Drinking enough water can help a pregnant woman retain less water and keep her complexion clear during hormonal shifts. More importantly, however, it can keep amniotic fluid at a healthy level, prevent hypertension, and help prevent premature labor.
It is not just a matter of drinking any water, of course. It is crucial that a pregnant woman drink the right water— and the right water can only be the healthiest and most contaminant-free water possible.
There are several contaminants in unfiltered tap water that can cause serious complications for a pregnancy. Recent studies have even linked drinking tap water during the first trimester to miscarriages.
Being informed about the dangers of tap water to a pregnancy is of vital import. The following is a look at some of the environmental contaminants that can be present in drinking water and create risks during pregnancy.
Lead – Lead can be found in extremely high and dangerous levels in water systems containing lead pipes, brass fixtures, or lead solder. The EPA recommends running the tap for at least 30 seconds to run out any sedentary environmental pollutants… but is that really enough of a precaution when it comes to the health during pregnancy?
Arsenic & Nitrates - If you live in an agricultural region and are surrounded by farms, your water may contain trace amounts of arsenic and nitrates from fertilizers that are used on crops. (Fertilizers with arsenic are now banned, but contaminants like this don’t go away overnight.)
Chlorine- Although it can be innocuous enough on its own, recent research has discovered that chlorine can combine with other elements in tap water to create chloroform and other more destructive chemicals. A few studies have begun to link these pollutants to higher risks of stunted fetal growth and miscarriage.
Prescription Medications – A variety of studies recently have revealed that our public water has become a soup of everything from Xanax to hormone-related prescriptions likebirth control. The studies are still few and far between, but it seems pretty obvious that avoiding the risk of contaminants like these in tap water should be a high priority during pregnancy.
Whether you live in what you think is a high-risk area or in what you think is a safe zone, you should get your water tested. Your local water company may provide testing, but there are also water testing kits that you can purchase online.
Think seriously about investing in a water filtration system for your home. Even if you drink bottled water for the duration of your pregnancy, you will still be using the tap for everything from cooking to brushing your teeth and ingesting tap water. It’s always better to be safe than sorry with stakes as high as the health and well-being of you and your child.
Choosing a Water Softener
Water, long acknowledged as the purest of elements, has become a little scary in the last few decades. Most people don’t feel comfortable drinking straight from the tap any longer. One of the most popular solutions for many homes is a water softener. But how do you know how to choose the right water softener?
Step 1 – Test your Water
Your first step should be to figure out just how hard your water is. Water softeners work by removing elements like calcium and magnesium, so you need to know just how much of these elements you’re dealing with and how powerful a system you’ll need.
If you’ve noticed that you have a hard time lathering soap or shampoo, you most likely have hard water. You can purchase a water testing kit and run the test yourself or hire a professional to come by and assess your water.
Step 2 – How much water do you use?
Once you have an idea of the hardness of your water, calculate your household usage in gallons. The average American can use as much as 50 to 80 gallons of water in a single day! Even when considering that some gallons are ‘shared’ (cooking, laundry), a household of 4 can still use 300 gallons in one day.
Step 3 – How much time do you have?
Lastly, you should consider how much time you have in your schedule to devote to the cleaning, running and maintenance of your water softening system. There is a wide range in usability and automation when it comes to water softeners. If you’re a very busy person without much time on your hands, you won’t want a unit that needs to be monitored constantly or thoroughly cleaned regularly. You should choose one that fits in well with your schedule and lifestyle.
Step 4 – Choose a water softener!
With all of this information on hand, you’ll be ready to start looking at units. If your water has high levels of calcium or magnesium, you’ll need to consider larger, more powerful units.
The ‘strength’ of a water softener is measured in how many ‘grains’ the unit can remove from a gallon. Calculating how many grains your household needs cleaned is easy: multiply the number of people in your home by the number of gallons they use and then multiply this by the hardness (or amount of grains) calculated by your water test… Using average consumption and the average grain of water in the United States, the calculation for a 3-person household would look like this:
3 people x 100 gallons each x 10 grains = 3000 grains a day
A household with these results would get by well with a smaller, 24,000 to 32,000 grain water softener. Units can run as high as 100,000+ grains for larger households or harder water.
It’s as easy as that! By following these few simple steps, you’ll be on your way to the kind of water you and your family deserve.