PHOTOGRAPH BY STEVE HELBER, AP
Published February 17, 2014
A chemical spill that left 300,000 residents of Charleston, West Virginia, without tap water last month is raising new concerns about the ability of the United States to maintain its high quality of drinking water.
While the U.S. has one of the safest water supplies in the world, experts say the Charleston contamination with a coal-washing chemical shows how quickly the trust that most Americans place in their drinking water can be shattered.
"We often don't think about where our water comes from," said Steve Fleischli, director and senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) Water Program in Los Angeles. "Does it come from a nearby river or a lake, intermittent streams, isolated wetlands, or an aquifer? Yes, you may have a water treatment plant, but if your water source is not protected, people face a real risk."
In Charleston on January 9, about 10,000 gallons of a little-known and unregulated chemical called 4-methylcyclohexane methanol (MCHM) leaked from an aboveground storage tank into the Elk River. The amount of the chemical overwhelmed the carbon filtration system in the West Virginia American Water treatment plant about a mile downstream. Within a week, more than 400 people were treated at hospitals for rashes, nausea, vomiting, and other symptoms.
West Virginia American Water decided by January 13 that the water was again safe to drink, because the concentration of MCHM had fallen below one part per million. But it soon emerged that there was little scientific information backing up that safety threshold, and this past week many West Virginians were still not drinking tap water. "I wouldn't drink it if you paid me," West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller told National Public Radio last Monday.
Leaky Ponds of Coal Ash
While Congress was holding hearings on the West Virginia incident, the next one happened. On February 2, up to 82,000 tons of toxic coal ash spilled into the Dan River, near the border of North Carolina and Virginia, from a pond at a closed Duke Energy power plant. This week state health officials warned people not to swim in the river or eat fish from it.
The Associated Press reported February 13 that the U.S. Attorney's Office in Raleigh has launched a criminal investigation into the spill, seeking records from Duke Energy and the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources—which had sued Duke last August for unpermitted discharges at Dan River and five other power plants.
"When you burn coal you leave behind metals and radioactivity," said Robert B. Jackson, an environmental scientist at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. "The ash is quite toxic. The waste products we create to produce energy, the waste we generate every day, are a threat to drinking water quality."
Coal ash contains arsenic, mercury, lead, thallium, and other dangerous contaminants. At power plants it is mixed with water, forming a slurry that is stored in large ponds. According to the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, 40 percent of the country's coal ash ponds are located in the southeast and contain 118 billion gallons of toxic material. Most of these impoundments, like the one on the Dan River, are located near major waterways.
In 2008, the dike at an impoundment in eastern Tennessee failed at the Tennessee Valley Authority Kingston Fossil Plant. More than 5.4 million cubic yards of coal ash spilled from the site and spread across more than 300 acres of land and water. Tests of nearby river water showed levels of lead and thallium exceeded safety limits for drinking water, but the TVA said at the time that the toxic metals were filtered out by water treatment processes. The TVA spent a year and a half cleaning up the sludge.
In 2000, the bottom of a coal ash pond in Kentucky crumbled and released an estimated 306 million gallons of slurry. Water supplies for 27,000 people were contaminated.
Following the Tennessee spill, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency identified 676 coal ash impoundments at 240 facilities, assigning a "high hazard" rating to 45 ponds. The rating indicates that a failure would probably cause loss of human life.
Droughts, Floods, and Hogs
Another threat, Jackson said, is severe weather. Research suggests that dry regions will become drier and wet regions wetter as a result of climate change. Both extremes pose significant challenges for maintaining safe drinking water.
Jackson pointed to a 1999 hurricane that flooded hog farms in North Carolina. "Hurricane Floyd came through and flushed the contents of the hog waste lagoons out into the streams and rivers," he said. The result was widespread fecal contamination of drinking water. More than decade after Floyd, North Carolina still has more than 4,000 hog waste lagoons.
At the other extreme of the weather spectrum is drought. Laurel Firestone, founder of the Community Water Center, a nonprofit advocacy group based in Visalia, California, said the most severe drought in California history may have a dramatic effect on water quality.
In a 2012 report prepared for the California State Water Control Board, scientists from the University of California at Davis found that about 254,000 people in the Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley are currently at risk for nitrate contamination of their drinking water. In one of the nation's most productive farming regions, nitrates from heavily fertilized fields leach into the groundwater. "Many small communities cannot afford safe drinking water treatment," the report said.
As a result of the current drought, farmers are having to rely on groundwater to irrigate their fields—which inevitably raises the concentration of nitrates in the water left in the ground. "The California drought is exacerbating problems that already existed," Firestone said. "Those being affected first are people who depend on the shallow wells. They are canaries in the coal mine." Exposures to high levels of nitrates can cause death, miscarriages, and blue baby syndrome, she said.
In general, Jackson said, and not just in California, "the most vulnerable group of people are those who get their water from a private water source. People who have private drinking water wells are far less protected than anyone else in the country. No one tests your water unless you pay for a test."
Polluters 'R Us
What worries Jackson and some other experts more than headline-making spills and weather is chronic pollution of a more insidious kind—from pharmaceuticals and personal care products, or PPCPs. Studies have shown that pharmaceuticals, especially antibiotics and steroids, are widely present in the nation's water supply. We excrete them in our urine; our livestock do as well. Other chemicals from soaps, shampoos, and lotions get washed down the drains of our tubs and showers. Sewage treatment plants are not equipped to remove them. Some have been shown to disrupt the hormone system in fish.
The EPA states there are no known human health effects from low-level exposure to PPCPs in drinking water, "but special scenarios (one example being fetal exposure to low levels of medications that a mother would ordinarily be avoiding) require more investigation."
"What we don't know are the interactions of thousands of different compounds that are taking place in our lakes, streams, and aquifers," said Jackson, who is studying the effects of some of the compounds on fish and mice. "When you have a spill like in West Virginia it's terrible, but at least you know about it. The cases that may be more dangerous are the slow and steady spills and chemical reactions that we don't know about."
For municipal utilities, such new worries come at a very bad time. In the American Society of Civil Engineers 2013 Report Card for America's Infrastructure, the nation's drinking water infrastructure was given a D grade for aging pipes, some of which date back to the Civil War. "At the dawn of the 21st century, much of our drinking water infrastructure is nearing the end of its useful life," the report stated. The American Water Works Association estimates there are 240,000 water-main breaks per year in the U.S. The investment needed to bring the nation's waterworks up to speed has been estimated in the trillions of dollars.
Money that might be devoted to such investments is instead being spent by a worried public on buying the stuff in plastic bottles. It made sense in West Virginia in recent weeks, but in general, according to Jackson, in spite of all the good reasons to be concerned about drinking water safety, resorting to bottles is not a sensible reflex. "People think bottled water is safer, but there is zero evidence that is true," he said. "The quality of water in city tap water is regulated far more closely than bottled water."
Or perhaps change the way we regulate water for human consumption.
Summary article on some options that go beyond the chemical-by-chemical approach that is used today.
Your article cogently links the popularity of bottled water with the decline of safe drinking water. Providing potable water to all is an expensive tedious chore done of necessity by the public sector. We are unwilling to replace our infrastructure out of an irrational distrust of government and turn instead to the bottle. Or perhaps to tea,
The problems in California stem from not having sufficient water for farms and people.Either stop immigration to California, or stop farming. Problem solved.
Industrial accidents noted were all in the article, were contained and cleaned up. Unless we abolish industry there will be some accidents and they will be dealt with. Then ending with the scare over safety of bottled water make a poorly written story with no solutions except stop human habitation of America.
@Lhanna Santos Only if the article is in Spanish or Portugese. In the English language America means the U.S.
@Richard Fawkes They have not been entirely cleaned up yet (if at all). Right now a thick layer of coal ash still sits in the Dan River near the spill site, and traces of ash have been found as far as 70 miles downstream, and a second pipe was found to be leaking Upstream of the initial spill (both pieces of info were released just last week). Duke will be cleaning up their mess for some time to come. As for the MCHM spill in West Virginia, folks will still be dealing with that for a while as the process of flushing your house completely of the chemical involves opening and hand-cleaning your hot water heater by a professional, or completely replacing the hot water heater -- and I doubt the Home Depot in Charleston and plumbers in the area can handle 300,000 folks even in the short month and a half since the spill first happened.
Lastly, with the slurry spill into Fields Creek (a tributary of the Kanawha River), apparently there was another incident from the exact same coal prep plant last fall, and I don't think they have been able to clean the slurry off the river bed yet (their original attempts to contain the spill included scattered haybales in the creek -- and yes, there are pics of this). And an article just today noted that a pipeline in Ontario has had 35 spills to date, most of them unreported. You should be shocked how often this stuff happens, we just don't hear about it.
Souce: I work for an organization that has been conducting testing at all three sites in WV and NC.
@Richard Fawkes Stop farming in California and deny much of the US perishable vegetables and fruit. You would also wipe out a major wine production area as well as much of the world's almond and walnut production. The loss of the almond production would likely trigger a collapse in the bee pollination industry, decreasing agricultural production across the US. I guess we could just stop eating--problem solved.
Reducing immigration will have minimal impact since much of the water is exported in agricultural products. The fact that more people are born in California than immigrate there means limiting immigration will have little impact.
Complex problems do not have simple solutions, full stop.
@Richard Fawkes How about people like you leave California. Problem solved.
I can find the numbers for the entire country but not just California. thanks in advance.
For a simple solution let the farmers have all ground and river water and let the cities have desalinated water from the ocean. Desalinated water though expensive is really the only source of water that cant run dry. Maybe if enough money were put into figuring out a cheap method that would really solve this problem once and for all.
How to Feed Our Growing Planet
National Geographic explores how we can feed the growing population without overwhelming the planet in our food series.
The Innovators Project
Meet some of science's most important movers and shakers—from past and present.
Latest News Video
During a recent voyage along South America's eastern coast, Justin Hofman was surprised to get close-up footage of an unfazed mother whale and her newborn calf.