There are two wastewater treatment facilities near Temecula, CA: the Santa Rose Water Reclamation Facility and the Elsinore Valley Regional Sewage Treatment Plant.
The Santa Rosa Water Reclamation Facility in Murrieta, CA uses a biological treatment process followed by chemical clarification, filtration and disinfection.
The Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District in Lake Elsinore, CA recycles wastewater from nearby homes and businesses. The water is treated, filtered, and disinfected. This facility uses an additional level of treatment called "tertiary" treatment, which uses a state-of-the-art UV system to remove 99.9% of pathogens. It is often discharged back into a water body. The recycled water is uses include irrigating crops, golf courses, fishing lakes, landscape irrigation, and wetlands enhancement.
Monday, February 27, 2017
M5.5 Blog: Campaign for Tap Water
These modules have given me insight into the our nations water system and what it takes to provide safe drinking water. The video The Story of Bottle Water further emphasized that tap water is indeed safe drinking water (in most cases). If I were to develop a nationwide campaign to increase drinking tap water and reduce disposable bottled water use, my slogan for the campaign would be "Tap into the taste of safe." This campaign slogan emphasizes that tap water is in fact safe and taste great.
M5.4 Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) and water quality
According to the EPA link provided in the module, Rancho Water supplies the drinking water for Temecula, CA. Below is the 2015 Consumer Confidence Report:
http://www.ranchowater.com/DocumentCenter/View/2076
Answer the following questions:
What is the source of your drinking water? Where does your water ORIGINATE? (It is treated at a water treatment plant, but what watershed or aquifer is the sources of the water?)
Rancho Water has two primary source of water: imported water and groundwater. The imported water comes from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The groundwater is pumped in Temecula Valley.
What chemicals were found in your water that were higher than expected?
It is worth noting that many chemicals were found in the drinking water provided by Rancho Water; however, most were below State Maximum Contaminant Levels and the Public Health Goal. The chemicals that Rancho Water noted of importance were Arsenic, Fluoride, Lead, and Manganese.
The district found Fluoride above MCL at 2 of 41 sites. To regulate the levels, Rancho Water blended the water from other wells to reduce the level to acceptable levels. The district also found Manganese above the secondary MCL in 2 of the 41 active wells. Although Manganese at low levels is nutritionally essential to humans, the district treats the groundwater to reduce the levels to acceptable levels. Two sites found that Lead exceeded action level.
What chemicals did you NOT expect to find in your water?
Honestly I did not know what to expect in my drinking water. I was surprised to see that 2 well sites noted that Lead exceeded action level. An action level is when 10% of consumer taps find Lead at 15 parts per billion.
Where does your water come from? The source! Track it from the source to your tap.
According to Rancho Water's website, 30% of their water is supplied by Temecula Valley aquifers. Rancho Water also purchases water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which imports water from Northern California and the Colorado River. Drinking water in Temecula is a blend of 30% well water, 65% imported water, and 5% highly treated waste water.
What did you discover about your water quality?
I discovered that the water quality seems to be acceptable according to the MCL and PHG. The chemicals noted in the CCR are concerning yet I trust that these regulations and the MCL's are in place according to sound scientific findings.
Do you use a filter for your water? What are you trying to filter out?
I use a Brita filter filter at home to filter out my tap water. My understanding is that the Brita filter filters out heavy metals and chloride. I use the filter to to minimize the taste and odor associated with tap water.
Do you drink bottled water? How does this square with what you learned when you watched the Story of Bottled Water (see next exercise)?
I typically do not use bottled water. I have a number of water bottles I use for cycling which I tend to fill up often.
http://www.ranchowater.com/DocumentCenter/View/2076
Answer the following questions:
What is the source of your drinking water? Where does your water ORIGINATE? (It is treated at a water treatment plant, but what watershed or aquifer is the sources of the water?)
Rancho Water has two primary source of water: imported water and groundwater. The imported water comes from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. The groundwater is pumped in Temecula Valley.
What chemicals were found in your water that were higher than expected?
It is worth noting that many chemicals were found in the drinking water provided by Rancho Water; however, most were below State Maximum Contaminant Levels and the Public Health Goal. The chemicals that Rancho Water noted of importance were Arsenic, Fluoride, Lead, and Manganese.
The district found Fluoride above MCL at 2 of 41 sites. To regulate the levels, Rancho Water blended the water from other wells to reduce the level to acceptable levels. The district also found Manganese above the secondary MCL in 2 of the 41 active wells. Although Manganese at low levels is nutritionally essential to humans, the district treats the groundwater to reduce the levels to acceptable levels. Two sites found that Lead exceeded action level.
What chemicals did you NOT expect to find in your water?
Honestly I did not know what to expect in my drinking water. I was surprised to see that 2 well sites noted that Lead exceeded action level. An action level is when 10% of consumer taps find Lead at 15 parts per billion.
Where does your water come from? The source! Track it from the source to your tap.
According to Rancho Water's website, 30% of their water is supplied by Temecula Valley aquifers. Rancho Water also purchases water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which imports water from Northern California and the Colorado River. Drinking water in Temecula is a blend of 30% well water, 65% imported water, and 5% highly treated waste water.
What did you discover about your water quality?
I discovered that the water quality seems to be acceptable according to the MCL and PHG. The chemicals noted in the CCR are concerning yet I trust that these regulations and the MCL's are in place according to sound scientific findings.
Do you use a filter for your water? What are you trying to filter out?
I use a Brita filter filter at home to filter out my tap water. My understanding is that the Brita filter filters out heavy metals and chloride. I use the filter to to minimize the taste and odor associated with tap water.
Do you drink bottled water? How does this square with what you learned when you watched the Story of Bottled Water (see next exercise)?
I typically do not use bottled water. I have a number of water bottles I use for cycling which I tend to fill up often.
M5.2 Safe Drinking Water
This module emphasized that our existence on this earth is dependent on the safety and protection of the water. The first video gave a nice overview of the amount of water that is on earth and the stark percentage that is actually potable. 0.007 % of the amount of water on earth is actually potable. In addition, this amount of water has to be provided to the 7 billion people on earth. Unfortunately, this is not the reality. According to the video, 1.2 billion people do not have access to clean water. It is alarming that more people on this earth have a cellular phone than access to clean water.
Given that water is precious to our existence it is important to protect the potable water at its source. The What is Ground Water? video explained the difference between surface water and ground water, and how each source is equally important. The protection of both sources of water is crucial because our day-to-day life and the food we buy are dependent on both sources of water.
The Clean Water Act of 1972 was enacted to protect the water in the US. It sought to improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of our nations water. The act defined water pollution in three ways: 1) point source (e.g., industrial pipe run-off) , 2) non-point source (e.g., agriculture run-off), and 3) filling (creating dry land). Each type of pollution was regulated to ensure the integrity of our water. For instance, with point source pollution, each company needed a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to drain their run-off into a water source. This regulation among others was able to improve water quality from less than 1/3 of the water meeting standards back in 1972 up to 2/3 of the water in the nation meeting standards according to the Clean Water Act.
Given that water is precious to our existence it is important to protect the potable water at its source. The What is Ground Water? video explained the difference between surface water and ground water, and how each source is equally important. The protection of both sources of water is crucial because our day-to-day life and the food we buy are dependent on both sources of water.
The Clean Water Act of 1972 was enacted to protect the water in the US. It sought to improve the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of our nations water. The act defined water pollution in three ways: 1) point source (e.g., industrial pipe run-off) , 2) non-point source (e.g., agriculture run-off), and 3) filling (creating dry land). Each type of pollution was regulated to ensure the integrity of our water. For instance, with point source pollution, each company needed a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit to drain their run-off into a water source. This regulation among others was able to improve water quality from less than 1/3 of the water meeting standards back in 1972 up to 2/3 of the water in the nation meeting standards according to the Clean Water Act.
Given the known hazards in our nations water, the Safe Drinking Water Act was implemented to protect public health from natural and man made toxins that were commonly found in our drinking water. This act required the protection of ALL our drinking water sources. This includes rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and ground water. The SDWA provides the national maximum of contaminants allowed in our drinking water and sets standards on how the EPA, state, and people can work together to ensure safe drinking water. States are required to meet the US EPA standards. In addition, this act provides an outline of barriers to pollution and prevention of contamination.
Both the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act are essential to public health because it tries to ensure that Americans are exposed to safe water. Because both ground water and surface water are equally important to our health, these acts try to limit the amount of contaminants in these water systems, and thus in our bodies.
Both the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act are essential to public health because it tries to ensure that Americans are exposed to safe water. Because both ground water and surface water are equally important to our health, these acts try to limit the amount of contaminants in these water systems, and thus in our bodies.
Monday, February 20, 2017
M4.6 Radon
Radon is an invisible odorless gas that is emitted by decaying uranium. It is discovered to be the second leading cause for lung cancer, second to smoking tobacco. Because of its elusive properties, it is recommended that homeowners and renters get their living space tested. If considered safe, it is often recommended that you get your home tested often, as radon levels can change. If hazardous levels are detected, it is recommended that you go to epa.gov/radon to find an EPA certified radon mitigator to fix the problem.
Given the fact that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer, and is responsible for 21, 000 excess deaths in the USA, it is important to develop and implement a national awareness campaign. The health hazards associated with radon would need to be compiled together to ensure that the target population is aware of its impact it has on public health. The stakeholders that would be necessary to develop this campaign would be major cancer research institutions, such as the EPA, NIH National Cancer Institute, and the CDC. The campaign would best be developed in partnership with a leading children's program such as the Boys and Girls Club, or a sports industry, such as the NFL. This would bring widespread awareness to this invisible naturally occurring gas. Utilizing these types of organizations would ensure that the target population is educated of the risks of radon. In addition, general infographics will be developed and advertised at targeted locations, such as home improvement stores. Once the campaign is rolled-out, it would take community outreach and social marketing techniques to educate and disseminate the information of radon to possibly decrease the prevalence of radon related deaths in the USA.
Given the fact that radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer, and is responsible for 21, 000 excess deaths in the USA, it is important to develop and implement a national awareness campaign. The health hazards associated with radon would need to be compiled together to ensure that the target population is aware of its impact it has on public health. The stakeholders that would be necessary to develop this campaign would be major cancer research institutions, such as the EPA, NIH National Cancer Institute, and the CDC. The campaign would best be developed in partnership with a leading children's program such as the Boys and Girls Club, or a sports industry, such as the NFL. This would bring widespread awareness to this invisible naturally occurring gas. Utilizing these types of organizations would ensure that the target population is educated of the risks of radon. In addition, general infographics will be developed and advertised at targeted locations, such as home improvement stores. Once the campaign is rolled-out, it would take community outreach and social marketing techniques to educate and disseminate the information of radon to possibly decrease the prevalence of radon related deaths in the USA.
M4.2 National Library ToxNet
After learning about the TOXNET toxicology website, I decided to use the Household Products database to learn about the potential health effects of Bleach.
The type of bleach I chose to learn more about was Ajax Cleanser with Bleach-Old Product, as it is a common household cleaning product I have used in the past. I was a relieve to learn that the overall health rating was a 1, the flammability rating was a 0, and the reactivity rating was a 0.
The acute health effects for this product were no surprise. Overexposure to the dust may cause respiratory tract irritation and direct eye contact to large amounts may cause eye irritation. It was interesting to note that no permanent eye injury is expected. Skin irritation is expected, but nothing severe. Lastly I am surprised that no hazards are expected when ingested.
One alarming thing about this product, according to the product MSDS, is that it contains a small amount of crystalline silca, which the NTP has listed as an anticipated carcinogen. The IARC has found limited significance for carcinogenicity in humans. Overall, I believe if this product is used in moderation, as directed and recommended, it seems that it would relatively safe for household use.
https://hpd.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/household/brands tbl=brands&id=3008010&query=ajax&searchas=TblBrands
The type of bleach I chose to learn more about was Ajax Cleanser with Bleach-Old Product, as it is a common household cleaning product I have used in the past. I was a relieve to learn that the overall health rating was a 1, the flammability rating was a 0, and the reactivity rating was a 0.
The acute health effects for this product were no surprise. Overexposure to the dust may cause respiratory tract irritation and direct eye contact to large amounts may cause eye irritation. It was interesting to note that no permanent eye injury is expected. Skin irritation is expected, but nothing severe. Lastly I am surprised that no hazards are expected when ingested.
One alarming thing about this product, according to the product MSDS, is that it contains a small amount of crystalline silca, which the NTP has listed as an anticipated carcinogen. The IARC has found limited significance for carcinogenicity in humans. Overall, I believe if this product is used in moderation, as directed and recommended, it seems that it would relatively safe for household use.
https://hpd.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/household/brands tbl=brands&id=3008010&query=ajax&searchas=TblBrands
Sunday, February 19, 2017
M2.4 Blog Assignment: Personal Care Products
After watching both videos, I became more skeptical of the toxicity and safety of the personal care products I use everyday. Both videos emphasized that we are using 12 personal care products a day (men generally use less), and are being exposed to at least 175 chemicals from personal care products alone. This is especially alarming since less than 20% of the chemicals have been tested for safety. With that said, the issue seems to be a lack of regulations. Companies are not required to state all the chemical ingredients that are being used in their products. As both videos stated, the 1938 Food, Drugs, and Cosmetics Act and the 1976 Toxics Substances Control Act are both outdated in which many of the chemicals that were allowed have been shown to be detrimental to our health. The Safe Chemical Act of 2010 should provide more safeguards regarding these hormone disruptors and cancer causing chemicals. The second video provided studies that noted the many detrimental health issues, potentially from the chemicals in our personal care products. but as noted, these are correlations in which there is not "one smoking gun" that causes these health issues.
This module gave me more insight into the lack of regulations there are on our personal care products. It is concerning to see that there has not been a drastic governmental intervention on the current policies that allow these chemicals to be used and exposed to everyone on a regular basis. It was always easy to trust the products that are out there, and to overlook the warning labels on these products; but after learning the information from both these videos, I believe I will be more conscientious when shopping for my personal care products.
This module gave me more insight into the lack of regulations there are on our personal care products. It is concerning to see that there has not been a drastic governmental intervention on the current policies that allow these chemicals to be used and exposed to everyone on a regular basis. It was always easy to trust the products that are out there, and to overlook the warning labels on these products; but after learning the information from both these videos, I believe I will be more conscientious when shopping for my personal care products.
Monday, February 13, 2017
M3.5 Transportation
The information on transportation provided in this module shed light on how making a drastic change in transportation in the country could lead to a number of health benefits. The statistics provided in the apha public transportation fact sheet seem logical. In the city of Temecula, CA and Murrieta, CA where I live and work, the transportation infrastructure is not conducive to bike commuting or public transportation. I believe I am 1 of a few individuals that bike commute to work. It would be great to see the city where I reside make a drastic change in transportation infrastructure to see the listed benefits in the apha public transportation fact sheet.
M3.4 Air Pollution
Who and what are the top polluters in your zip code?
Metal Container Corp. Mira Loma.
What percent of the homes in your zipcode have lead-based paint?
1%
Are there Superfund sites in your zip?
There are 2 "worst toxic waste sites" in Riverside County.
What can you tell us about the Superfund sites that are near where you live?
Alark Hard Chrome is a company that does electroplating, a process of plating one metal on top of another through hydrolysis. Chemicals such as cadmium and chromium "drip" into the ground and surface water.
What did you learn about the air quality in your zipcode?
I am shocked to learn that the air quality in Murrieta, CA is among the worst in the country,
How about the water quality?
Water in Murrieta, CA is worse than the national average.
How did your zipcode fair on a social justice / environmental justice basis?
"Low-income communities and communities of color may suffer greater impacts from environmental degradation that other groups."
M3.3 Environmental Justice Blog
This module emphasized the lack of environmental justice for certain communities within our country and in some parts of the world. It is unfortunate that within our recent history that certain communities and areas are subjected to environmental hazards. The debacle in Flint Michigan and other areas of the country demonstrate the lack of environmental justice for primarily poor and black communities; and also validate their social determinants. It is sad and unfortunate to realize that there are social determinants at this point in history. The concept of social determinants connect to the "Black Lives Matter" movement by urge to push back against on the structural and societal framework that is predominantly within their community. It is a movement to resist the determinants, particularly the socioeconomic and environment factors within their community.
Also, this module points out the future of environmental issues for the country and the rest of the world under President Trump. His agenda along with his cabinet disavow climate science and promote the fossil fuel industry. The idea that the administration is pushing more fossil fuel development and not renewable energy demonstrates their lack of concern for the environment as a whole.
Also, this module points out the future of environmental issues for the country and the rest of the world under President Trump. His agenda along with his cabinet disavow climate science and promote the fossil fuel industry. The idea that the administration is pushing more fossil fuel development and not renewable energy demonstrates their lack of concern for the environment as a whole.
M3.2 Vulnerable Populations
The information provided in this module shed light on how vulnerable we can be to health issues and environmental toxins. First of all, it is shocking how omnipresent these chemicals are in our day to day lives. The lack of regulation on these chemicals leaves everyone--rich or poor--vulnerable to being exposed. In the first video, Dr. Manchanda really emphasized that health care needs to start upstream and that the more upstreamist in our society can really alter our health care system from "sick care" to actual health care. Another theme that stuck out to me in this module is that detrimental chemicals are not being regulated and are being exposed to our most vulnerable, babies. Although at low doses, Dr. Lanphear emphasized that low doses can effect health by pointing out that a therapeutic dose or Ritalin has about the same parts per billion as the typical amount of lead found in the majority of babies. This is troubling given that there are many critical windows and key developmental stages in a babies life. This module emphasized that detrimental chemicals have been demonstrated to cause developmental, reproductive, and general health issues in everyone from babies to adults and that regulations and policies need to discussed in order to prevent further exposure to future generations.
M3.1 Biomonitoring
Chemical(s)
|
Potential Health Effects
|
Dioxins
|
Carcinogen, endocrine disruptor, cognitive disfunction
|
DDT
|
Reproductive toxicant
|
Organophosphate
|
(pesticide) neurotoxicant, Parkinson’s
|
Lead
|
Neurotoxicant, kidney toxicant, insomnia, impotence
|
Solvent
|
Liver toxicant, neurotoxicant
|
PCBs
|
Carcinogen, toxic to immune, neuro, and repro systems
|
Phthalates
|
Repro toxicant (infertility), testicular damage, endometriosis, endocrine disruptor
|
Receiving these labs would be troubling, but not surprising. The presence of some of the above chemicals are not regulated and can be encountered relatively often on a day to day basis, such as solvents. Some of the above have been regarded extremely hazardous and are now banned or highly regulated, such as DDT. The troubling issue is that the banned chemicals can still be found in our bodies, in which their deleterious long term health effects are not for certain. The highly regulated chemical DDT was allowed to be used against the malaria epidemic in the recent past so receiving a positive result is troubling yet expected for any public health worker working abroad where malaria is prevalent. Although the health effects of the above chemicals have been demonstrated, more studies need to be conducted to suggest a national or global health policy regulating the regular use of such chemicals.
Monday, February 6, 2017
M2.3 Blog Assignment: Household Products
Shout Triple Acting Laundry Stain Remover
The first product I chose to look-up in the database is a product I unfortunately use often because of my pets. According to the database, this product does not meet the criteria for classification in any hazard class according to OSHA 29 CFR. Its HMIS rating is below:
Health: 1 (slight)
Flammability: 0 (minimal)
Reactivity: 0 (minimal)
After reviewing the information provided by the database, I was glad there was not an alarming health hazard for this product since I use it often and around my pets. It was interesting that this product does not have any listed potential health effects. Overall, I will continue to use this product and will most likely buy it again in the future.
Armor All No. 7 Auto Polish and Cleaner
My second product that I searched in the database is a common cleaner I use for my car and other items that need shining around the house. Its HMIS rating is:
Health: 1 (slight)
Flammability: 1 (slight)
Reactivity: 0 (minimal)
According to the database, this product overall does not have any alarming hazards. This product may cause irritation on prolonged or repeated contact to the skin and eyes. It is non-toxic if ingested. According to OSHA, it is not carcinogenic. Overall, I will continue to use this product because it health hazard does not seem like an issue.
The first product I chose to look-up in the database is a product I unfortunately use often because of my pets. According to the database, this product does not meet the criteria for classification in any hazard class according to OSHA 29 CFR. Its HMIS rating is below:
Health: 1 (slight)
Flammability: 0 (minimal)
Reactivity: 0 (minimal)
After reviewing the information provided by the database, I was glad there was not an alarming health hazard for this product since I use it often and around my pets. It was interesting that this product does not have any listed potential health effects. Overall, I will continue to use this product and will most likely buy it again in the future.
Armor All No. 7 Auto Polish and Cleaner
My second product that I searched in the database is a common cleaner I use for my car and other items that need shining around the house. Its HMIS rating is:
Health: 1 (slight)
Flammability: 1 (slight)
Reactivity: 0 (minimal)
According to the database, this product overall does not have any alarming hazards. This product may cause irritation on prolonged or repeated contact to the skin and eyes. It is non-toxic if ingested. According to OSHA, it is not carcinogenic. Overall, I will continue to use this product because it health hazard does not seem like an issue.
Friday, February 3, 2017
M2.2 Blog Assignment: Personal Care Products
The two products that I chose to look up in the EWG's cosmetic database were: 1) Head and Shoulders 2 in 1 dandruff shampoo and 2) Dr. Bronner's 18 in 1 pure castile soap. I have been using the Head and Shoulders shampoo consistently for years and it is probably one of my favorite shampoos. I recently starting using the Dr. Bronner's soap just because my friend that works at the Dr. Bronner's facility gave me the bottle for free.
After looking at both ratings, I was not shocked that the Dr. Bronner's soap has such a low rating because it was one of the first soaps that I heard had a healthy "reputation." However, I was surprised that my favorite shampoo, Head and Shoulders, had a moderately hazardous rating. I looked at the reasons as to why it had such a high rating and the they were shocking. It was shocking to see that a lot of the ingredients have "use restrictions", "cancer", and "allergies and immunotoxicity" concerns deemed by other countries regulatory agencies like the European SCCS. On the other hand, it was nice to see that the ingredients in the Dr. Bronner's soap had no "use restrictions" or "allergies and immunotoxicity" concerns.
Given the findings from the two products, I would like to believe that I will be more conscientious when buying future soaps and shampoos. It is shocking that such a popular shampoo like Head and Shoulders would have such hazardous ingredients in their product. To think that the new administration is striving to reduce regulations is troubling, especially when common household products that are considered hazardous are freely allowed on the market. It would be in the governments best interest to increase the oversight on these manufacturers and prevent them from using known hazardous ingredients. I believe it would be beneficial for all consumers to know the hazards and risks that are in their everyday daily care products and it would be the manufacturer and governments duty to at least provide the information.
After looking at both ratings, I was not shocked that the Dr. Bronner's soap has such a low rating because it was one of the first soaps that I heard had a healthy "reputation." However, I was surprised that my favorite shampoo, Head and Shoulders, had a moderately hazardous rating. I looked at the reasons as to why it had such a high rating and the they were shocking. It was shocking to see that a lot of the ingredients have "use restrictions", "cancer", and "allergies and immunotoxicity" concerns deemed by other countries regulatory agencies like the European SCCS. On the other hand, it was nice to see that the ingredients in the Dr. Bronner's soap had no "use restrictions" or "allergies and immunotoxicity" concerns.
Given the findings from the two products, I would like to believe that I will be more conscientious when buying future soaps and shampoos. It is shocking that such a popular shampoo like Head and Shoulders would have such hazardous ingredients in their product. To think that the new administration is striving to reduce regulations is troubling, especially when common household products that are considered hazardous are freely allowed on the market. It would be in the governments best interest to increase the oversight on these manufacturers and prevent them from using known hazardous ingredients. I believe it would be beneficial for all consumers to know the hazards and risks that are in their everyday daily care products and it would be the manufacturer and governments duty to at least provide the information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)