Despite my fascination with the adage, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result,” I still occasionally find myself — a creature of habit — falling into a pattern of repetitive unsuccessful behavior.
There are thousands of per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS) in use for countless consumer products. PFAS can make products non-stick or waterproof. They are also used in industrial processes and make up fire-fighting foams used by first responders. With so many types of PFAS in use, EPA researchers have had to use new and innovative tools to gather more information about these chemicals.
Water treatment professionals face many challenges while working to provide customers with safe drinking water. Disinfection is critical to protect public health, but harmful byproducts may form during the process. In addition, some disinfectants volatilize and lose effectiveness when exposed to sunlight. Keeping tanks covered may help to reduce these problems while providing additional benefits.
As per many authentic references, about 97 percent of the water in the world belongs to oceans and seas, whereas 3 percent is freshwater available as glaciers, ice caps, and waterbodies. While we strive to manage available lakes, rivers, and other inland water resources to meet present and future public needs, why not look to these saline water reservoirs as potential alternatives for sustainability?
EPA scientists are developing and evaluating new methods to evaluate chemicals for potential health effects. These methods are fast, cost effective, and reduce our reliance on traditional methods which use laboratory animals.
When I attended the U.S. EPA-hosted PFAS Summit held at the Horsham, PA high school auditorium on July 25, 2018, the education I received from state and municipal leaders focusing on the local problem was more than just a professional briefing. It was ominously personal, due to the fact that the Water Online editorial office where I work and drink water every day is served by a utility sitting smack-dab in the middle of one of the most concentrated PFAS hotspots in the U.S.
Sorting through practical, legal, and environmental considerations related to Michigan House Bills 5752 and 5753 — proposed oversight for onsite wastewater treatment systems
The past few months have been highly eventful for California water watchers. In June, by a margin of 57 to 43 percent, California voters approved Proposition 68, a $4.1 billion parks and water bond that will provide approximately $1.3 billion for water-related projects across the state. Then in July, the California Water Commission approved $2.6 billion of funds authorized by Proposition 1, passed by the voters in 2014, to be used for eight new water storage projects. These developments reflect that California is taking a bold and multi-pronged approach to addressing its water needs, investing both in new large infrastructure projects and in more modest projects to improve the state’s existing resources and assets.
In 1992, the City of Madison, Wisconsin, found concentrations of lead in their drinking water exceeding the 90th percentile action level of 0.015 mg/L set by EPA. Lead (Pb) is a naturally-occurring metal that was commonly used in household plumbing materials, such as lead service lines and leaded solder joints, before limits were set on its use in 1986.
Smart water networks today do more than read meters. They also collect data from sensors on distribution networks to help reduce non-revenue water losses, monitor and control pressures in water mains, and prevent unwanted sewage discharge. These new smart infrastructure solutions help water utilities expand the definition of smart water — going beyond applications aimed at improving billing accuracy and efficiency.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|