Hysteria in Parts Per Billion
Recent Reports Aside, We Have a Safe Water Supply
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
After reading the March 10 Metro article "Area Tap Water Has Traces of Medicines," I recalled a paper presented at the Chesapeake section of the American Water Works Association's conference in Ocean City three years ago. The paper, which did not trigger any alarm bells for the experts in the audience, pointed out that there were indications of traces of caffeine showing up in the water supply. After the paper was presented, audience members agreed that the data indicated a need for long-term research and study. However, some perspective is needed.
I worked for 35 years in the water industry. All elements in water, particulate matter and contaminants are normally measured in parts per million or billion. Parts per trillion are difficult to detect unless you know what you are looking for, and they normally pose no more threat than your daily dose of cola, sugar, aspirin or other product that you may consume.
U.S. water purveyors are governed by the Environmental Protection Agency, which imposes some of the most stringent clean and safe water requirements in the world. The water suppliers in the Washington region not only meet but in many cases exceed EPA requirements, which means that they could conceivably ratchet down their standards of water quality and still be deemed safe. The quality of the U.S. water supply far exceeds that of many industrialized nations. In some countries, thousands die daily from a lack of safe and clean water. I say all this to emphasize that before we subscribe to the Chicken Little approach, we should have a reality check.
We can perform research and develop technology to provide ultra-clean water, but that in itself brings another set of problems to the table: Is ultra-clean water really good for you? What about the economics of paying for this research and technology? Customers cry foul when water purveyors try to raise rates to finance water and sewer rehabilitation projects to provide better service. Finally, when one considers the carbon footprint that man is leaving in the atmosphere, you would think that removing such minuscule trace elements from the water supply would be far down on the list of our concerns. Maybe a little Prozac in the water would be a good thing!
Our water is consistently clean and safe. Let's be thankful for it.
-- Alfred R. Richardson
Bowie
The writer worked for the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission from 1971 to 2006.

