Category Archives: Pollution

How the Drought is Poisoning California’s Drinking Water

As California struggles through the fourth year of its historic drought, the effects are starting to hit a little closer to home… and our health.

The results of a 10-year study of California groundwater quality showed some disturbing findings.

Normally, Californians get about 30% of their drinking water from aquifers, but the drought has forced Californians to rely on these aquifers for more than 60% of our water needs.

The study found that roughly 20% of our groundwater is contaminated with high concentrations of dangerous substances like arsenic, uranium and nitrates. And it’s not getting any better…

As groundwater keeps getting lower, our drinking water will become more and more unsafe.

The longer the drought continues, the more we will rely on groundwater. You can probably see how this is quite the vicious cycle. But is there an answer? In order to understand that, we have to know what caused this quality issue.

Where do the contaminants come from?

Contaminants enter California’s water artificially – through heavy use of nitrogen-based fertilizers on farms – and naturally – through erosion of natural deposits.

Heavy reliance on nitrogen fertilizers (and animal waste) has led to increased levels of nitrates in the water. At levels above 10 ppm (parts per million), nitrates can impede the blood’s ability to carry oxygen, leading to birth defects and cancers of the ovaries and thyroid.

Agriculture alone isn’t the only source of contamination; arsenic – which is not used on farms – turned up more than nitrates. The study also found an alarming amount of aquifers poisoned with uranium, which is a contaminant not used in farms, but which has been pushed further into the water table (5-10 feet per year) by irrigation.

According to Kenneth Belitz, the study’s lead author and chief of the USGS’s National Water Quality Assessment Program, the process of contaminants slowly moving further down into the water table affects all areas of California.

Former agricultural areas that have evolved into suburban (Santa Ana, for example) will start to see the effects of years-old nitrates sinking into their water tables. Today’s farming hotspots – especially the San Joaquin Valley (where San Diego gets a portion of its water) – could be slowly building up nitrate levels year by year that could lead to much higher nitrate levels in well water.

How is the drought making it worse?

This heart-wrenching video from High Country News depicts how the drought is exacerbating the level of contaminants in California’s water. It shows the situation in East Orosi, one of the areas hit hardest by the drought.

Chad Fischer, East Orosi District Engineer, explains how landowners are digging a higher level of wells, putting more stress on the aquifers:

“It’s simple, drill a lot of wells, produce a lot of water. The water tables are going to drop and the level of contaminants is going to go up.”

As groundwater levels drop and the level of contaminants stays the same, the concentration of nitrates in groundwater supply will continue to increase.

Think of it as a small amount of poison that’s diluted by a large amount of water. The poison is relatively harmless as long as the water level stays high enough. But when the water level decreases, there’s not as much to dilute the poison, making it much more dangerous.

This issue is hitting areas of California at different times. East Orosi is getting the worst of it now. Residents use five-gallon plastic jugs for drinking, cleaning, brushing teeth, making tea and coffee, making soup and cleaning fruits and vegetables.

East Orosi’s situation serves as a stark warning to the rest of the state about the dangers of the drought on water quality. Hopefully it serves as a canary in the coal mine demonstrating that serious actions need to be taken for the health and safety of the people.

When will it end?

That’s the bad news. According to NASA Analysis, California’s aquifers are extremely depleted (by 11 trillion gallons, to be exact). Lower rainfall in the coming years and steady or increased farming will only continue to diminish these sources, therefore raising contaminant concentration.

As the drought continues, it’s imperative that California residents continue to monitor their local drinking water quality. Every municipality is required to send out a Water Quality Report (or CCR) annually, detailing local contaminant levels.

As always, the safest solution for your water’s safety is to install water filter systems in your home to ensure the highest quality clean water in your home regardless of outside circumstances. See your home water filter options HERE.

More information: Mother Jones on California’s Drinking Water

Shampoo, Narcotics and Birth Control: Things You Didn’t Know You Were Drinking

When was the last time you drank shampoo? How about painkillers or birth control? Statistically, you consumed all of the above recently, whether you wanted to or not.

Researchers have found antiseptics, pharmaceuticals, detergents and a number of other products everywhere they’ve looked for them in our water supplies.

According to a study published by the EPA, the nation’s water sources tested positive for dangerous pharmaceuticals such as oxycodone, high-blood pressure medications and antidepressants.

Water treatment plants are not required to test for or monitor levels of these so-called “emerging contaminants” in our drinking water. Some of the products – such as shampoo and dish detergent – have been in our water supplies for decades, but skyrocketing rates of prescription drug use and abuse in the U.S. are leading to other contaminants that didn’t used to pollute our water.

In fact, a recent Mayo Clinic study determined that nearly 70% of Americans take prescription drugs. Many people flush their old and unused pharmaceuticals. The only proper way to dispose of old prescription or over-the-counter meds is to take them to a pharmacist. This doesn’t prevent all pharmaceuticals from getting into our water, though. We also urinate and otherwise excrete trace amounts of drugs and antibiotics into drains and toilets.

While emerging contaminants are not currently regulated, but this does not mean they don’t pose a risk. It’s unclear how emerging contaminants in drinking water affect our health, but it’s an area of growing concern among health officials.

One medication of which we know some effects is birth control. This is because hormones work at very low concentrations in the human body, suggesting that birth control can affect our bodies even though it shows up in low concentrations in our water. This possibility was highlighted recently when fish in the Potomac River were found to have both male and female sex glands after exposure to estrogen.

Humans have been lucky to not experience such extreme consequences, but the fact that fish are absorbing pharmaceuticals from human wastewater and suffering mutations suggests problems down the line. It may also come full circle, as we are likely to consume the same contaminants with our seafood.

While healthy adults have sophisticated detoxification processes that may protect them from emerging contaminants for the time being, pregnant women and children are much more susceptible.

Home drinking water filters are a good way to cut down the amount of emerging contaminants in your tap water, according to Timothy Bartrand, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow at Drexel University, Philadelphia, who worked with the National Science Foundation (NSF) on drinking water research.

We encourage you to ask your water authority what it is doing to keep you safe from emerging contaminants. The number for the San Diego County Water Authority is (858) 522-6600.

Also, consider using an Evolution Drinking Water System in your home to not only cut down on emerging contaminants, but also add vital trace minerals to your family’s drinking, cooking and coffee/tea brewing water.

The Next Water Revolution

Drinking water has evolved in three major shifts – or revolutions – over the past 2,000 years. Each of these revolutions either made water vastly more available or potable for a large number of people.

In his book, Water 4.0: The Past, Present, and Future of the World’s Most Vital Resource, David Sedlak discusses the three water revolutions of the past 2,000 years as well as the next one – Water 4.0 – that needs to happen for the sake of societal health and safety.

The author explains that today, “continued population growth and climate change stretch the ability of urban water systems to meet our needs.” The process of devising and financing a solution will be anything but east, but Sedlak is confident there is a way.

In today’s post, we’ll discuss Sedlak’s 3 water revolutions as well as the one we need to start planning for today.

Water 1.0

The Romans are known for a number of astonishing accomplishments, but one we don’t often hear about (maybe because it’s not sexy enough for a Hollywood blockbuster) is how the behemoth ancient civilization managed to provide anywhere from 500,000 to 1 million people with drinking water.

Ingenious Roman engineers devised a system of gravity-harnessing aqueducts to bring water into the city from surrounding rural areas. Not only did they build this solution to solve the issue of water shortage, but the Romans also built a sophisticated sewer system to handle runoff. This revolution paved the way for the expansion of civilization over the next 1,900 years.

Water 2.0

The boom of the Industrial Revolution at the end of the 19th century saw the emergence of water wheels and steam engines. This led to toilets and the vast amount of waste created as a result. Rather than disposing of waste in the fields, urban toilets sent human waste down the sewers, from where it entered bodies of water and traveled downstream to some less fortunate communities.

The corresponding rise in typhoid fever and cholera necessitated the need for another water revolution. This time, the engineers behind water’s advancement were from MIT. They formulated a system of filtering with sand, which surprisingly eliminated most disease from drinking water. Similar improvements used chlorine to further disinfect the water. Water 2.0 was born, effectively increasing the average American lifespan by 15 years.

Water 3.0

While the second water revolution allowed for drinking water to be treated, there still was not a widely available technology for treating wastewater. Thus, industrial centers and large municipalities simply disposed of sewage in rivers and lakes. Waterfront cities such as New York, Cleveland and Chicago reeked and fish died at an alarming rate.

In an ultimately successful effort to curb the expansion of water pollution across the country, the federal government passed the Clean Water Act in 1972. This landmark legislation allocated federal funds toward the construction of sewage treatment plants. Water 3.0 saved the health of The Great Lakes and numerous other bodies of water across the country.

Water 4.0?

Sedlak explains that we are now in need of a 4th water revolution, one that is likely going to be more complicated – and more expensive – than its precedents.

Many of the water utilities constructed 40-50 years ago are aged significantly. As with many societal problems, the roadblock in front of water reconstruction is cost. The growth of population has led to a consequential strain on water systems built for far fewer people.

In the Northeast, many cities have experienced raw sewage overflows when snow or rain fills treatment plants to their limits. The Southwest is experiencing a problem on the other side of the spectrum; areas such as Arizona and California are suffering from drought and water shortages.

The problem for both regions is that climate change models suggest that the areas experiencing overflow will only get wetter and the drought-stricken regions will only get drier.

Three areas in which Water 4.0 has already begun to take form are desalination, water recycling and decentralization.

Desalination – the process of treating seawater to make it potable – will be a significant, but not nearly a majority of San Diego’s water (7%) starting next year. Water recycling, in which wastewater is either treated to drinking water standards or at least to a level that it can be used for watering crops, is also popular in Southern California. Decentralization likely will be a prevalent technology across the country, especially given the amount of Americans living in suburbs. This practice would involve the construction of smaller water treatment facilities outside of the large ones in city centers.

Sedlak says that Water 4.0 will happen one way or another, the only question is whether we will be proactive in preparing our water systems. The sad truth is that more often, civilizations wait for catastrophe to allocate the necessary funds for water system improvements.

Why is San Diego’s Tap Water So Bad?

If you didn’t already know (and if you live here, you know) San Diego has some very subpar tap water. In fact, it has some of the worst tap water in the country, according to a study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG). It’s a shame that such a beautiful city nestled up to a pristine blue ocean has tainted drinking water.

It’s easy to complain about the water here, but it’s also important to understand why the water quality is so poor and the effects it can have on our health and well-being.

This information is pertinent for many people outside of San Diego, too. There have been a number of incidents in the past year compromising drinking water supplies across the country.

Why San Diego?

With the ocean down the street, it’s easy to forget that San Diego is actually in a desert. If you know one thing about deserts, it’s that there is very little water. We’re still some time away from desalination plants (like the one in construction in Carlsbad) being a significant source of drinking water. Thus, we get our water from thousands of miles away.

Our two main sources are the Colorado River and the California State Water Project in Northern California. There are a number of issues with each of these sources.

The Colorado River provides the majority (60%) of San Diego’s water. It runs through canyons and rocks which deposit volatile organic chemicals.

20% of San Diego’s water comes from the California Water Project in Northern California, the hotbed of agriculture for the whole country. The problem with this is the vast amount of fertilizers used on these farms. Fertilizers contain nitrates and nitrites, which make their way into the water table and into our tap water.

These problems aren’t unique to San Diego, though. A five-year study by the EPA found more than 300 contaminants in tap water across California. And worse, California water authorities were cited for 5,514 federal and state violations over that five-year period.

What are the effects of contaminated tap water?

Everything. Pollutants in your tap water are just as bad as they sound.

Below are some of the worst offenders present in San Diego’s water along with their health effects.

Arsenic – Skin damage, circulatory problems, increased risk of cancer
Asbestos (from the cement in water mains) – Increased risk of cancer and intestinal polyps
Lead – Impaired mental and physical development in children, attention and learning deficits, high blood pressure
Nitrates/Nitrites – Oxygen distribution problems, Blue Baby Syndrome

What can we do?

It’s easy to be alarmed at the quality of our tap water, but it’s important to take steps toward making it safer. The government is too strapped for cash and too slow-moving to take the initiative, so it’s up to us to manage our own water.

1. Contact your county health department for a report on your local water quality and to learn about any recent violations.

2. Read our guide to Comparing Water Filters to understand the different options you have for getting clean, healthy water in your home.

3. Call 619-356-3766 to speak with a water expert about how you can get the Certified Healthiest Water in your home today.

7 reasons to claim water for life, not for coal

Safe, affordable and accessible water is one of our planet’s scarcest natural resources. Many people don’t have access to fresh water for sanitation, agriculture, or even to drink.

Yet, global water consumption by the power sector is growing; it’s expected to more than double by 2035, with coal projects accounting for 50% of increased water use. Vast quantities of water are used in coal mining, coal washing and for cooling coal-fired power plants.

We cannot allow coal interests to grab already scarce water resources and at the same time dramatically increase their carbon pollution. That will only accelerate climate change and make water shortages even more acute.

GreenPeace outlined 7 reasons why we should claim water for the life, not for coal:

1. 2 billion people, or almost one-third of the world’s population, live in countries with absolute water scarcity.

2. Coal is one of the most water-intensive methods of generating electricity. Every 3.5 minutes a typical coal-fired power plant withdraws enough water to fill an Olympic-sized swimming pool. Electricity is generated by burning coal to convert water into high-pressure steam to drive turbines; water is then used to cool the steam so it can go back to the boiler again. Water is also needed to wash and process coal before it is burned, to wash coal ash out, to reduce dust from the coal stockpile and to put out fires.

3. There are plans to construct at least 1200 new coal-fired power plants and mega coal mines around the world. Much of the proposed expansion is in water-stressed regions, which already suffer from limited supplies of fresh water for sanitation, health and livelihoods.

4. South Africa’s energy utility Eskom uses 10,000 litres of water per second, yet local residents are forced to buy bottled water, because no clean drinking water is available to them.

5. 16 mega coal power bases proposed in China will consume 10 billion cubic metres of water every year, equal to one-sixth of the annual flow of the iconic Yellow River.

6. In the six worst-hit districts of India’s Vidarbha region there were over 6,000 documented cases of farmers committing suicide between 2001 and 2010 as their livelihoods failed due to lack of water for irrigation. And a total of 40,000 suicides in the whole of Maharashtra. Yet there are now plans to build a further cluster of 71 coal plants in Vidarbha.

7. Wind-generated electricity uses no water. Go renewables!

Via: Greenpeace

Big Fracking Problem: How oil drilling wreaks havoc on your water

The highly controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing – better known as fracking – is back in the news again after a recent report revealed that regulations protecting municipal drinking water sources are not adequate.

This comes on the heels of California’s announcement last months that it would be shutting down 11 fracking wastewater disposal sites for leaks that contaminated drinking water aquifers.

Many expected the Government Accountability Office report to finally raise concerns about fracking’s effects on personal and environmental health, but a study by Media Matters found that the media is dropping the ball on covering the report’s findings.

Fracking has mustered a great deal of support because of its proposed benefits, including increased energy independence and beefy economic stimulus (to the tune of $24-28 billion annually in large fracking states such as California). The practice’s drawbacks, though, negate its benefits.

How does it work?

Oil companies love fracking because it is an an effective method for extracting more oil than regular vertical drilling. The hydraulic fracturing process drills down into the earth and then pumps a mixture of fluid chemicals and sand at a very high pressure to create horizontal fractures, releasing oil from rock formations. The oil – and the chemicals – then bubble to the surface.

The chemicals used for fracking include “ethylene glycol, which can damage kidneys; formaldehyde, a known cancer risk; and naphthalene, considered a possible carcinogen.”

Once separated from the oil, the chemicals are disposed of in “wastewater injection wells.”

The problem

The safety of these wastewater injection wells is basically a crapshoot. The regulations for constructing one vary by location. For example, Ohio’s Department of Natural Resources issues permits to construct wells, but companies in Pennsylvania must go to the EPA for permits. The result? 200 wastewater injection wells in Ohio and only 10 in Pennsylvania.

The GAO’s report suggests that these hastily granted permits (Ohio DNR typically processes applications in 6 weeks versus the EPA’s 6 months) result in poorly regulated wells that are responsible for poisoning water supplies.

Despite being built of mostly steel and concrete, the wastewater injection well casings are highly susceptible to seismic activity, which wouldn’t be as much of an issue if fracking wasn’t also scientifically proven to cause earthquakes.

Frequent earthquakes, caused by the process of injecting water into faults in the earth, damage these deep injection wells and allow dangerous chemicals to leak into the earth, and eventually into your tap water.

Why isn’t this a bigger story?

The fact that constant reports of fracking’s negative effects on municipal drinking water haven’t been covered in the news is highly alarming. The Media Matter study found that in four of the states doing the most fracking (Texas, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Colorado), only one major newspaper reported on the GAO’s findings.

Several of these papers have published editorials in support of fracking, likely revealing the reasoning behind their failure to cover the GAO report.

What can you do?

As fracking continues to boom, the number of dangerous wastewater injection wells will also increase.

Check out this map to see if fracking occurs where you live.

As always, you can write a letter to your local Congressman, but unless you’re ready to include a fat check rivaling those oil and gas industry lobbyists are writing, your letter is likely to go unnoticed.

If fracking is happening in your area, your water could be at risk today. Take matters into your hands and find out how a Whole Home Water System can protect you from the carcinogens fracking is releasing into your water.

Update: More info on this topic from a member of the National Resources Defense Council

Getting drinking water from the sea, but for a price

The ongoing severe drought in California is the just the latest in a recent series of water crises that have kept large areas of America parched.

Parts of Texas and the Southwest are still recovering from historic drought conditions that dried up the region several years ago. And given global climate change and the world’s growing population, the costly process of desalination — turning ocean or brackish water into clean, drinkable fresh water — is being considered a viable option in California and elsewhere.

In California alone, 17 desalination plants are either under construction or being planned, including the $1 billion Carlsbad facility near San Diego, scheduled to open in 2016. Once fully operational, that plant is expected to produce 50 million gallons of drinking water a day.

“We’ll produce enough water to meet the daily needs of 300,000 San Diego residents,” Peter MacLaggan, senior vice president at Poseidon Resources, the company partnering with the San Diego County Water Authority on the project, said last month. “We’ll have at least one water supply that’s drought-proof — it won’t matter whether it snows in the Rockies or rains in the Sierras.”

That desalinated water, however, won’t be cheap.

“When you want to desalinate, it’s incredibly energy-intensive, and therefore cost-intensive,” said Michael Webber, deputy director of the Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. “And that’s the rub of it. It’s drought-resistant, it’s abundant, it’s never going to go away, but it’s costly to do.”

There are two main desalination processes. Thermal, as the name implies, involves heating salt water and then distilling pure, drinkable water from the steam. And there’s reverse osmosis, the process Carlsbad will use — where sea water or brackish water is forced through filter membranes that remove the salts.

Thermal desalination is huge in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in the Middle East. That method makes economic sense there, says Webber, “because they have energy but don’t have water, so they trade energy for water.”

California also expends a lot of energy — as well as hundreds of millions of dollars annually — to store, pump and deliver water across the state.

The question, then, is whether Californians will be willing to purchase the expensive water that desalination facilities produce. As an example, Webber points to the Tampa Bay Seawater Desalination facility in Florida, which can produce up to 25 million gallons of drinking water daily. But due in part to the cost, the Tampa Bay plant is rarely run at full capacity.

Desalination can make economic sense when it’s combined with good design and proper integration into a region’s infrastructure. And given its growing use worldwide — industry website Desalination.com says more than 60 million cubic meters of drinking water are produced worldwide daily by desalination — technological advances could help reduce the cost of turning salt water into fresh water.

“I do see that water is the next oil,” Webber notes, “that water is the great resource of the 21st century over which battles [will be] fought, money is invested.”

Toledo’s water crisis: Why we haven’t seen the end of it

Toledo, Ohio’s weekend-long drinking water scare came to an end this morning, but this Midwestern city’s water woes are far from over.

The buzz word in Toledo over the weekend was microcystin, referring to a deadly toxin found in blue-green algae blooms. Dangerous levels of the substance in Toledo’s drinking water led to a advisory against drinking, brushing teeth or bathing in city water.

While death is rare in connection with the toxin, it did cause 75 deaths in Brazil in 1995. Microcystin can also cause liver malfunction, diarrhea and vomiting.

This weekend’s scare was a result of widespread algal blooms in the Maumee Bay area of Lake Erie, Toledo’s main water source. The blooms are not, however, the result of a natural disaster; Toledo’s water crisis is the first of what will likely be many man-made water crises related to unnatural growth in Lake Erie.

The culprit

Algal blooms occur as a result of an inordinate amount of fertilizer flowing into Lake Erie from farms on the watershed.

86% of the fertilizer used on farms in Ohio, Indiana and Michigan is in the form of phosphorus-packed pellets.

The use of fertilizer isn’t necessarily dangerous on its own, but a popular agricultural practice in the Lake Erie region called no-till farming can have some stark unintended consequences.

In order to prevent erosion, farmers avoid plowing their fields, leaving fertilizer pellets on the surface, ready to be washed away. This is where nature comes in. Heavy rains easily wash away about 1 pound per acre of fertilizer into the Maumee River, which feeds into Maumee Bay.

Just as phosphorus is intended to fuel crop growth, it feeds algae in Lake Erie, leading to toxic algal blooms.

A recurring problem

Algal blooms are nothing new in Lake Erie. In the 1960s, rampant agricultural and industrial pollution – to the tune of 64 million pounds of phosphorus per year – fed algal blooms.

In addition to contaminating Toledo’s water supply, the growth led to seriously damaged marine life, a pressure point thanks to the multi-billion dollar Lake Erie tourism industry. U.S. and Canada officials teamed up and spent $8 billion on sewage plant upgrades and cut the amount of phosphates allowed in household products.

It seems obvious that this sixth straight year of increasingly widespread algal blooms necessitates some governmental intervention similar to that seen in the 70s and 80s.

Today, a financial commitment of this stature (which, we might add, would be significantly higher considering inflation) would require much more than Toledo opening her pocket book. Farmers in Ohio as well as Indiana and Michigan (who share the same watershed), would have to commit to cutting fertilizer use or finding an alternative to no-till farming that would also not contribute to erosion. This is a highly unlikely outcome unless officials agree to compensate the farmers who will have to make significant changes to their practices.

In fewer words, don’t expect a solution any time soon.

This is not the end

Lake Erie’s science-fiction-style neon green takeover this past weekend is unfortunately going to be a familiar scene in lakes across the globe. A 2012 report suggested that algal blooms will be “one of the most serious health risks of the 21st century,” appearing in China, Japan, Brazil and Australia. In the US alone, more than 40,000 large lakes may contain microcystin.

With the rising importance of providing food for a booming population and an extreme water shortage hitting America’s largest agriculture-producing state, we can only expect use of phosphorus-laden fertilizers to continue.

Rising temperatures have lead to more frequent and volatile storms, carrying an increasing amount of phosphorus into water sources. Toxic algae blooms thrive in higher temperatures.

The problem is complicated further by foreign species such as Lake Erie’s zebra mussels, which eat non-toxic competitors to blue-green algae and excrete more phosphorus for the toxic algae to feast on.

Lesson learned

The recurring theme every time a water crisis arises as a result of preventable human actions is that it is the citizen’s responsibility to care for his or her own water.

While a municipality’s first interest should always be its own people, we see time and again that political complications often take the front seat. This current crisis will likely be relegated to the back burner until elections have passed.

In the mean time, we recommend writing your local representative and ask about what your municipality is doing to avoid the oncoming dangers of algal blooms. Also, consider a drinking water system to protect yourself and your family from future water crises.

Live near a farm? You might want to read this

Do you live close to a farm? If so, you will want to see the results of a recent University of Minnesota study that found the rate of groundwater contamination rising at an alarming rate.

Researchers indicated that nitrate levels in drinking water are skyrocketing. Nitrates are very dangerous and can cause severe illness and death when consumed above contaminant levels.

The University of Minnesota study explained that not only are nitrate levels already high, but they will increase 45% in the coming years. This is because farm subsidies from the government are allowing farmers to finance the expensive process of wetland conversion.

In simpler terms, the government is using our tax dollars to pay for farmers to begin spreading nitrate-packed fertilizer over groundwater sources. Not only is this costing you money, but it will also begin to cost you your health if you don’t take measures to protect yourself and your family from the coming onslaught of nitrates.

Congress has the ability to pass an appropriations bill that would protect over 1 million acres of land from further nitrate-pollution. Since they’ve proved themselves less than trustworthy, your best option is taking matters into your hands.

Even if you don’t live directly next to a farm, your water could come from an area with significant agriculture pollution. Research your local water utility and see where your tap water comes from. This is especially important in major farming states such as California, where farmers have free reign to fertilize as they wish due to high demand for their crops during this historic drought.

Since it’s highly unlikely that the government will cut back on farm subsidies or move forward with conservation measures, it’s imperative that you take matters into your own hands and personally filter your tap water. Evolution Healthworks offers a comprehensive line of filtration systems that will remove nitrates and 99.9% of other toxic pollutants from your water.

More on this topic from the Environmental Working Group (EWG)

Clean Water Act’s Restrictions Put Your Health In Danger

Companies that have spilled oil, carcinogens and dangerous bacteria into lakes, rivers and other waters are not being prosecuted, according to Environmental Protection Agency regulators working on those cases, who estimate that more than 1,500 major pollution investigations have been discontinued or shelved in the last four years.

The Clean Water Act was intended to end dangerous water pollution by regulating every major polluter. But today, regulators may be unable to prosecute as many as half of the nation’s largest known polluters because officials lack jurisdiction or because proving jurisdiction would be overwhelmingly difficult or time consuming, according to midlevel officials

About 117 million Americans get their drinking water from sources fed by waters that are vulnerable to exclusion from the Clean Water Act, according to E.P.A. reports but midlevel E.P.A. officials said that internal studies indicated that as many as 45 percent of major polluters might be either outside regulatory reach or in areas where proving jurisdiction is overwhelmingly difficult

Cannon Air Force Base near Clovis, N.M., for instance, recently informed E.P.A. officials that it no longer considered itself subject to the act. It dumps wastewater — containing bacteria and human sewage — into a lake on the base.

More than 200 oil spill cases were delayed as of 2008, according to a memorandum written by an E.P.A. official and collected by Congressional investigators. And even as the number of facilities violating the Clean Water Act has steadily increased each year, E.P.A. judicial actions against major polluters have fallen by almost half since the Supreme Court rulings, according to an analysis of E.P.A. data by The New York Times.

The Clean Water Act does not directly deal with drinking water. Rather, it was meant to regulate the polluters that contaminated the waterways that supplied many towns and cities with tap water.

The two Supreme Court decisions at issue — Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. United States Army Corps of Engineers in 2001 and Rapanos v. United States in 2006 — focused on the federal government’s jurisdiction over various wetlands. In both cases, dissenting justices warned that limiting the power of the federal government would weaken its ability to combat water pollution.

In 2007, for instance, after a pipe manufacturer in Alabama, a division of McWane Inc., was convicted and fined millions of dollars for dumping oil, lead, zinc and other chemicals into a large creek, an appellate court overturned that conviction and fine, ruling that the Supreme Court precedent exempted the waterway from the Clean Water Act. The company eventually settled by agreeing to pay a smaller amount and submit to probation.

Via: New York Times

Check out our PRODUCTS on how to combat these issues.

California Shuts Down Wastewater Injection Wells Over Water Contamination Fears

There are many environmental concerns connected to the proliferation of domestic gas and oil drilling. One specific concern is the spread of chemicals used in the drilling process into drinking water aquifers.

California has taken notice and shut down the activities of gas and oil companies aquifers in Central Valley over fears that they may have contaminated aquifers with fracking fluids and other toxic waste from drilling operations. The state’s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources earlier this month ordered seven energy companies to stop injecting wastewater in certain wells, claiming that the practice “poses danger to life, health, property, and natural resources.”

ProPublica has the full scoop:

The problem is that at least 100 of the state’s aquifers were presumed to be useless for drinking and farming because the water was either of poor quality, or too deep underground to easily access. Years ago, the state exempted them from environmental protection and allowed the oil and gas industry to intentionally pollute them. But not all aquifers are exempted, and the system amounts to a patchwork of protected and unprotected water resources deep underground. Now, according to the cease and desist orders issued by the state, it appears that at least seven injection wells are likely pumping waste into fresh water aquifers protected by the law, and not other aquifers sacrificed by the state long ago.

“The aquifers in question with respect to the orders that have been issued are not exempt,” said Ed Wilson, a spokesperson for the California Department of Conservation in an email.

A 2012 ProPublica investigation of more than 700,000 injection wells across the country found that wells were often poorly regulated and experienced high rates of failure, outcomes that were likely polluting underground water supplies that are supposed to be protected by federal law. That investigation also disclosed a little-known program overseen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that exempted more than 1,000 other drinking water aquifers from any sort of pollution protection at all, many of them in California.

Those are the aquifers at issue today. The exempted aquifers, according to documents the state filed with the U.S. EPA in 1981 and obtained by ProPublica, were poorly defined and ambiguously outlined. They were often identified by hand-drawn lines on a map, making it difficult to know today exactly which bodies of water were supposed to be protected, and by which aspects of the governing laws. Those exemptions and documents were signed by California Gov. Jerry Brown, who also was governor in 1981.

State officials emphasized to ProPublica that they will now order water testing and monitoring at the injection well sites in question. To date, they said, they have not yet found any of the more regulated aquifers to have been contaminated.

We at Evolution Healthworks understand that there’s a growing problem with water contamination across the country. Check out our solutions to ensure you and your loved ones are getting the healthiest water.