OT: Arsenic in your water?

Page 1 of 2  
They say don't drink from the garden hose.
Well, maybe you shouldn't drink from the house faucet either, if you don't like eau de arsenic.
The Center for Public Integrity (winner of the Pulitzer Prize) has just pub lished a long, carefully-detailed account of how the EPA has been blocked f rom increasing the required safety standards for arsenic in drinking water on the basis of scientific research.
So, who did it? All the evidence from the Center's investigation pointed to one congressman: Mike Simpson of Idaho. Lobbying payoff...
http://www.publicintegrity.org/
The Center is one of the best "muckraker" sites, conducting investigations into wrong-doing in government and private enterprise. I support it and ur ge my fellow US gardeners to do likewise.
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/1/2014 3:24 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

Modern analytical chemistry can find things down to parts per trillion. If you are familiar with Avagadro's number you will find an atom of anything in any substance you analyze.
Poison is dose related. Everybody knows that.
In my familiarity with EPA standards, they are way too stringent. They extrapolate toxicity of anything down to zero when even they know that below certain thresholds something will not be toxic.
Most of these muckracker, chemophobic sites take advantage of the technically ignorant.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, July 1, 2014 1:18:14 PM UTC-7, Frank wrote:

n't like eau de arsenic.

published a long, carefully-detailed account of how the EPA has been block ed from increasing the required safety standards for arsenic in drinking wa ter on the basis of scientific research.

d to one congressman: Mike Simpson of Idaho. Lobbying payoff...

ons into wrong-doing in government and private enterprise. I support it an d urge my fellow US gardeners to do likewise.

I AM familiar with Avocado's Number, prepared guacamole sold by Trader Joe. . but seriously, no I am not so ignorant that I don't know about AvOgadro's number. (Note spelling correction.)
...but seriously, people like you blithely throw the baby out with the bath water with glib non sequiturs like the above.
It is also characteristic of certain political orientations, even -- or esp ecially -- in the wake of careful studies that contradict their philosophie s to go immediately on the attack with meaningless epithets like "chemopho bic".
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/1/2014 5:55 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

I know you Higgy ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In wrote:

Wait.
You mean to say that the EPA, an government agency created by politicians to carry out laws written by politicians, managed by politicians for politicians, has been somehow influenced by a politician?
Really?
--
snipped-for-privacy@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/1/2014 4:52 PM, Bert wrote:

Better answer than mine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Higgs Boson wrote:

Detecting metals in low concentration is not the issue. The issue is the level of harm associated with the level of consumption.

Yes that is the point.

So 730 cancers per 100,000 is acceptable to you? Or do you have epidemiological evidence that the risk is not that high?

Generally true but drifting off the point again. The question is what is that threshold?

That happens too but have you established that is happening here?

Once upon a time I used to get into trouble over avagardner's number......
D
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/1/2014 12:24 PM, Higgs Boson wrote:

What a coincidence! Today, being the first of the month, I paid bills. Included with the bill from the Oak Park Water Service (OPWS) was the brochure "Annual Water Quality Report". No arsenic was detected at Metropolitan Water District's Jensen Treatment Plant or at the intermediary Calleguas Municipal Water District.
If you (Higgs) get your water from the State Water Project and not from the Colorado River, your water is also from the Jensen Treatment Plant, although some well water might have been added to your supply. The water I get from the OPWS is strictly from the Jensen Treatment Plant; the soils in this part of Ventura County are too highly mineralized for well water to be used even for agriculture.
The OPWS itself does not test for arsenic or several other contaminants. That is understandable since the OPWS only stores and distributes the water and does not treat it. The OPWS does test chlorine levels and also tests for byproducts of the chlorination. These relate to disinfecting the water, making sure there is enough but not too much chlorine.
The Calleguas Municipal Water District also uses ozone for disinfecting the water. However, ozone generally leaves no residue once the water leaves the treatment plant.
--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/07/2014 12:51 PM, David E. Ross wrote:

Barf. No wonder municipally supplied always tastes so foul in comparison to rainwater.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tuesday, July 1, 2014 11:03:18 PM UTC-7, Fran Farmer wrote:

.

Delighted for you that you have access to rainwater. Some of us don't.
Forgot where you live? I'm in So. Calif.
In the 60's70's there was an LSD scare around here. The "hippies" -- for la ck of a more accurate term for the drug crazies -- were threatening to spik e our water with LSD. Fortunately it was quickly established that CHLORINE in the water would have neutralized the LSD>
This is my recollection from decades ago. If anybody remembers differently , please share.
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/07/2014 2:35 AM, Higgs Boson wrote:

You don't get rain where you live?
If you do get rain and you live in a house (as opposed to an apartment), you too could probably drink rainwater with a bit of modification to your guttering and the installation of what USians call a cistern and which we call a tank.

Australia and my spouse says the Napa valley reminds him of Australia.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/2/2014 6:56 PM, Fran Farmer wrote:

Both Higgs and I live in southern California, about 30 miles and several microclimates apart. Since the start of our rain-year on 1 October, we have had 5.87 inches of rain in my immediate neighborhood. It has been 66 days without measurable rain. This might be the worst draught ever for California.
--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 3/07/2014 2:58 PM, David E. Ross wrote:

So how is your garden holding up? We've had a number of droughts since we moved to this place and each time it happens we learn which of our plants are tough and survivors. I now have lots of grey plants in the garden. But I also have roses. Roses are as tough as old boots.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/3/2014 11:54 PM, Fran Farmer wrote:

My garden is okay although the plants were not selected for drought tolerance. I use water-conserving methods of irrigating my garden.
Details are at <http://www.rossde.com/garden/drought.html . While I have not updated that Web page for the current drought, its content is still applicable. Because of exceptionally high water costs -- close to $5.50 per 100 cubic feet -- I follow those methods even when there is no drought. Even with "sailor showers" and not always flushing the toilets, our water bill is about $160 per month and expected to increase.
Arrgghh! In my previous reply, I used "draught" -- which is British English for either "draft" or the game of checkers (usually "draughts") -- when I meant "drought".
--
David E. Ross
Climate: California Mediterranean, see
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/07/2014 4:31 AM, David E. Ross wrote:

That's an interesting site. I notice that you give your roses far more water than I do. I've found roses to be as tough as old boots and not in need of a lot of water. I stopped counting how many I had when I got to 112 and they all flower. Some never get any water except what falls from the sky. In a garden the size of mine I don't bother watering in many areas.
While I

Ouch. I'm glad we supply our own water. Not that I like drinking municipal water anyway - I hate the taste of it so the cost would just be another disincentive for us.

:-)) I think we all knew what you meant.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 9:58:03 PM UTC-7, David E. Ross wrote:

And the previous few years were not exactly Biblical floods! Yes, this is very, very serious. As usual, we can count on some -- most - people to Do The Right Thing, conservation-wise but there will always be pigs and negligents. (is that a word?)
One area of concern is the vast Central Valley where about 1/3 of the country's fruits & vegs are grown. (Set aside the politicking whereby these giant agri-businesses get to buy water at cheap rates originally set by Congress for small 140-acre farmers.)
Problem is that enormous tracts of land are used for two of the thirstiest crops -- rice and cotton -- which should be grown in areas that have enough rainfall or rivers, instead of seriously depleting the water table. Politics!
The water wars in California are legendary. Endless books, articles, academic theses on the subject. Including the film "Chinatown" which -- except for the fictional dramatizations -- was pretty close to the truth.
HB

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

don't like eau de arsenic.

just published a long, carefully-detailed account of how the EPA has been blocked from increasing the required safety standards for arsenic in drinking water on the basis of scientific research.

pointed to one congressman: Mike Simpson of Idaho. Lobbying payoff...

investigations into wrong-doing in government and private enterprise. I support it and urge my fellow US gardeners to do likewise.

trillion.

One Calif air quality project I worked on was to measure 2-3 ppm NO continuously in boiler flue gas. This is unbelievably low, below the "real" level of pollutants and should be considered in the noise level. In a laboratory, that could be possible. But in an industrial application, it was impossible to prove reliable readings. For one thing, the effects of vibration & even minor temperature changes on the instrumentation made it impossible to get repeatable readings. Another was finding a stable calibration gas for that range. And too much effect from slight temperature changes and gas interactions with the walls of the gas cylinder and tubing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

has

arsenic

Originally in the early 70's and for several years after that, EPA was a "good" organization and did a lot of good getting "real" pollution cleaned up. It got acid rain scaled way back, which was well on the way to destroying much of the Appalachian forests. Same for the Clean Water Act in slowing the pollution of lakes and rivers. They did a lot to get lead out of the environment, and a lot of other good things.
However, they are completely run by special interests today. It's obvious when we see how they ignore real pollution problems but go after bizarre "new pollutants" like "carbon".... It's really pitiful that they have to be taken to the Supreme Court to be reigned back in to reality.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 1:24:35 AM UTC-7, Guv Bob wrote:

ic

"good" organization and did a lot of good getting "real" pollution cleaned up. It got acid rain scaled way back, which was well on the way to destroy ing much of the Appalachian forests. Same for the Clean Water Act in slowi ng the pollution of lakes and rivers. They did a lot to get lead out of th e environment, and a lot of other good things.

s when we see how they ignore real pollution problems but go after bizarre "new pollutants" like "carbon".... It's really pitiful that they have to be taken to the Supreme Court to be reigned back in to reality.
Grammar police here: REINED (as with horses) not REIGNED as with monarchs .
Would welcome more info on "special interests" and EPA ignoring "real pollu tion problems". Straight request.
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

enterprise.

bills.

from

Plant,

for

contaminants.

disinfecting

Excellent points. The local water treatment plant here scaled way back the use of "nasty ozone" and went to more "nice clean chlorine." Unbelievable. Like you said, ozone is great for disinfecting and disappears. Chlorine at any concentration is harmful. Our tap water now smells like bleach. My guess is that the chlorine supplier paid somebody off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.