[Sca-cooks] Long response Re: River Pollution Study

[Dan Phelps]

Was written:

> I _thought_ that we processed our waste before returning the water to
rivers.
> I know we do here.  I also know the system isn't perfect and that many
people
> relieve themselves against the nearest tree or bush regularly. I also
admit
> that there are a LOT of us here on earth.
>
> That said, while I respect everyone on this list, this study people keep
> talking about sounds a lot like another guilt trip for the human species,
and
> of course us bad old American capitalists in particular. I just want to
see
> what is says, or if it's just another Urban Legend. I haven't found any
> references online or in the news yet, so could somebody point me in the
right
> direction?

I work for a state environmental regulatory agency and deal with one method
of disposal of "secondarily treated municipal waste water", underground
injection. While we are getting quite far a field from cooking I can confirm
that there are substances which will go through waste water treatment plants
in the states without being removed.  The reason is rather simple, the
process is primarily biological.  It's a lot like brewing, the critters eat
the waste products we want to get rid of and convert it either to gas or to
sludge.  The water that comes out is then disposed in a number of ways.  If
the water is to be used for "reuse" it goes through a high level
disinfection process and then is used for irrigation.  Chlorination,
ultraviolet radiation and ozonation are processes that are non-biological
that can effect the chemicals of concern in water.  We tend to use
chlorination, the Europeans who have more concern than we regarding the
byproducts of chlorination, tend toward ozonation.  The Austrailians are
experimenting with microwaving the sludge.  Here in the states the sludge is
disposed in landfills, used in silvaculture (tree growing for lumber) or
sold a fertilizer.

The substances of particular concern are typically components of personal
care products and pharmaceuticals but there are other products as well.
Saccharin and caffeine are relatively benign examples.  I recently attended
a talk by a Fed type who is investigating and there were a number of
articles out in various newspapers, all actually different versions of the
same article, a week or so back.  I'll post the article cites if everyone
wants me to.  The concern is that the pharmaceuticals and possibly the
components of personal care products are suspected of being active at the
parts per billion or even parts per trillion level.  Additionally no one
knows what synergetic effects may be occurring.   Synergetic effects are the
biological effects where in two and two does not equal four, that is to say
that the "sum" can be far greater than the parts, ...the individual effects
of chemical A and B in combination are magnified or even changed into a
whole new effect.   By the way there are lots of pharaceuticals used in the
poultry, beef and pork "ranching/farming" industries.

Daniel Raoul

mka

Daniel C. Phelps, P.G.