Los Angeles fights ban on spreading sewage sludge on farm fields.

[NNadir]

LOS ANGELES - Los Angeles is challenging a new voter-approved ban that will soon block the city from dumping almost all of its treated sewage on rural farm fields near Bakersfield.

The city filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday calling the Kern County ban on sewage sludge "arbitrary and irrational."

The lawsuit also contends the ban is forcing the city to seek alternative ways to dispose of the sludge "at a cost of millions of dollars and great environmental harm." Two Southern California sanitation districts, farmers who spread the biosolids on their land, and businesses that transport the sludge are also listed as plaintiffs.

The treated human waste is trucked to the rural county, dried in massive piles and then spread on land used to grow crops for livestock...

...The lawsuit claims the environment in Kern County will be all the poorer without the fertilizer that is spread on the 4,200-acre Green Acres Farm, a disposal site owned by the city of Los Angeles. The city was required to perform a $16 million upgrade of its wastewater processing equipment in order to spread its sludge at Green Acres, but the ban makes that expense pointless, the lawsuit said.

The Environmental Protection Agency decided in the early 1990s that spreading treated sewage waste over farmland was preferable to sending it out to sea or pouring it in landfills. Since then, urban centers have trucked their sewage to rural areas, where the waste primarily is used as fertilizer for animal feed crops.

Some farmers swear by the benefits of the waste, saying it can improve soil quality by turning nutrient-poor ground heavy with clay into arable farmland...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/sludge_ban

[nam78_two]

1. kick/nt

[pinto]

2. Confusing conflation of the $16 million upgrade (?), but on it's face

I support using treated sludge as fertilizer.

[NNadir]

5. I suspect, but do not know, that the upgrade was designed to remove

unnatural contaminants.

Most of the content of sewage is biomass. However, some untoward things are also there, primarily heavy metals.

I recall reading somewhere that the sewage outfall pipe at Los Angeles has a pretty high quality deposit of copper sulfide (with some lead sulfide mixed in) at its opening.

The new equipment may be for that purpose, removing metals through some technology like ion exchange.

[jpak]

13. Another nonsensical "biomass is bad" remark.

To get rid of the heavy metals, oil and the other nasty stuff, all that needs to be done is separate roadway storm water and industrial effluent streams from domestic sewage streams.

Aerobic sewage digestion produces lots of solids (sludge) whereas anaerobic digestion produces lots of usable methane and very little sludge by comparison.

(but the sludge can still be used for fertilizer).

Anaerobic digestion would produce enough energy to run the treatment plants (heat and power) - and maybe a little extra juice to sell to the grid.

So in that respect - "biomass good".

nice try though...

[hankthecrank]

3. The soil feeds us thur plants we need to put our waste back

The best place for our manure is back on the soil that feeds us.

Along as other things put in the sewer are not put on the soil also.

Best if it was only the manure and plant waste coming from garbage disposer going onto the soil.

[patricia92243]

4. Sludge used as fertilizer for cow food sounds good to me. nt

[dcfirefighter]

6. It's common practice, I support it

the only caveat is fear of heavy metals. It generally must be tested first.

I know that the Blue Plains treatment plant, that treats all the sewage from washington dc and surrounding maryland, sells it's sludge as a fertilizer.

It's not uncommon to find plastic tampon parts and condoms in feed cornfields.

[unhappycamper]

7. Another alternative is to do the right thing.

It's expensive, but it's environmentally friendly.

http://www.mwra.state.ma.us/03sewer/html/sewditp.htm

[NNadir]

9. The plant you link also ends up making fertilizer from the sludge.

From your link:

Mimicking the stomach's natural digestion process, microorganisms naturally present in the sludge work to break sludge and scum down into methane gas, carbon dioxide, solid organic byproducts, and water. Digestion significantly reduces sludge quantity. The methane gas produced in the digesters is used in the plant's on-site power generating facility to save operating costs by reducing consumption of purchased energy. Digested sludge leaves Deer Island by barge for MWRA's Pelletizing Facility at Fore River, where it is further processed into a fertilizer product.

This may be what LA is doing. I don't know.

[Solo_in_MD]

8. Typical urban bullying, and LA is good at it

They NIMBY refineries, power plants, water treatment, and dumps but expect outlying areas to take it all with a smile. They take all the water from the Owens Valley, creating an ecological disaster and then whine when they are asked to do partial restoration. NYC and Chicago are no better.

When they lose in court they will go to the legislature to insure they can force their waste on others and plunder outlying areas by getting all the urban areas to support such laws.

If it was that clean, why are they not using it the area rather than trucking it all the way over the Grapevine? OC won't take it, but we can foist it off on the bumpkins in Kern. Yeah, I feel strongly about it.

[NNadir]

14. Well, it doesn't seem that all of the farmers oppose the stuff.

Some seem pleased with its effects on the fields.

I think the issue is more aesthetic than practical. If I lived in Kern county, I don't know that I would have voted against the proposal. There's a lot of phosphorous and nitrogen in that stuff I bet. In the case of nitrogen, one might argue on environmental grounds that the sludge prevents the expenditure of energy that would otherwise come from a nitrogen fixation plant. It seems wasteful to landfill it and worse to dump it in the ocean. One might argue, and be reasonable, that the sewage be treated extensively, digested, whatever. But there is still a considerable amount of inert solids in sewage and many of them - especially phosphorous - are valuable. For many years Pacific Islands were unmercifully mined to collect thousands of years of deposits of bird shit.

http://www.american.edu/TED/NAURU.htm

I'm not sure that this is quite the same bit as the Owens Valley, which I agree was a tragedy. LA is probably the worst designed city in the US, although I'm sure that others might pipe in with different candidates for "worst cities." Let me put it this way: LA is the worst city I ever lived in personally. I was thrilled to get out of there. I think I did California a big favor by leaving it. It's way over stretched, especially with respect to water. There was beautiful geography, beautiful weather, but frankly, that land can't support that many people forever.

Personally, I think that California should recover everything in municipal sewage, especially the water though. It's crazy to have outfall pipes in California. I believe that San Diego recovers most of its water, so certainly LA can do it.

As for the solids, I can't think of a much better approach than spreading them on fields, once they are appropriately sterile.

But let me ask you, in a different vein, do you favor dismantling cities? Where would you put the people who live in them? Would you rather have the Angelinos themselves in Kern County, rather than their compost?

[Solo_in_MD]

16. My concern is the NIMBYism

Some social activists assert that the dirty services in cities are always placed in minority areas, and there is considerable merit to their claims. Today with gentrification and such, they are pushing them out of the city entirely. Most city dwellers have no idea what their cushy lifestyle costs others in terms of air quality, water, and trash.

I spent a fair amount of time in the Owens Valley while the fight was on with LADWP. Though the big issues are settled, they still fight everything they can. The alkalai dust from Owens Lake has done untold damage to residents lungs and poullted the air and land regionaly, and for what? Lawns and golf courses.

Cites are tolerable (for now), but they need to be self suffienct and mangage their own trash and services within their own jurisdictions whenever possible. Power generation I can see being outsourced but there is no justifiaction for hauling a LA country trash over the Grapevine or sending it by barge to other states (NYC).

[NNadir]

17. I would expand the criticism from city dwellers to westerners in general.

I'd go farther. Most people in the developed world have no idea what their life style costs.

This is why, for instance, we have global climate change.

I think most people think that the problem lies with someone who lives somewhere else. Lately we've been hearing a lot of Americans ripping China on environmental issues. How wierd, exactly, is that?

But back to California: I think lawns and golf courses aren't particularly suited for a desert in general. I favor conservation, especially of water. If I lived in California - not that I would ever want to do so again - I would definitely try to go for native landscaping.

I favor water conservation here, and I live in New Jersey. We don't water our lawn, ever.

Personally I think that in many - but certainly not all - cases, an urban lifestyle can have minimal impact on the environment. LA isn't a well structured city to be sure, but the problem I think has to do with the fact that it's really not a city at all. It's a giant suburb. Therein lies the problem. I live in a suburb myself, but my dream - at least after my kids are grown - is to live in a place like Brooklyn, where I was born. In Brooklyn you can get on a subway and end up in different worlds in a matter of minutes. Now all I have to do is to convince my wife.

The bottom line is that California should not be the most populated state in the Union. But I can't say that I see a perfect solution for rectifying the matter though. The Owens Valley was destroyed a long time ago. Now may not be the perfect time to stop the consequences.

[dcfirefighter]

18. Separation of uses makes sense

Cities actually tend to be 'greener' than suburbs, and even most rural areas, on a per capita, and per GDP basis. The dirty 'stuff' is due to concentration - that same 'stuff' is created in suburbs and rural areas, at a greater rate per capita or per GDP$, it's just spread out more (at first). Of course if it it's something like a greenhouse gas, it doesn't matter where it's generated. If it's something like NPK water emissions, it doesn't matter where in the watershed it's emitted, it all winds up in the bay, so to speak.

[ConcernedCanuk]

10. Problem some may not be aware of - medications in treated sewage

.
.
.

I only got 300,000 hits on Google first try

Here it is
______________________________________________________________

Drugs Are Accumulating in Sewage Sludge, Surface Waters, and Drinking Water

Factory Farm & Medical Drugs End Up in Sewage Sludge, Surface Waters, & Drinking Water

Source: http://www.healthmall.com/newsletter.cfm?type=article&id=944&a

Study says Prescription Meds Polluting Waters

PA scientists examining the sludge from a U.S. sewage-treatment plant 20 years ago found that the incoming sewage contained excreted aspirin,
caffeine, and nicotine. At about the same time, the cholesterol-lowering drug clofibric acid turned up in a groundwater reservoir being used by the Phoenix, AZ area. The drug had entered with treated sewage, which the city had been using to replenish the aquifer. Experts at that time didn't pay attention to the finding. It should have been a wake-up call, experts now argue, because if clofibric acid could pass through a sewage-treatment plant and percolate through soil unscathed, so could a host of other drugs.

Now new studies by Chris Metcalfe of Trent University in Peterborough,
Ontario, reports finding a broad mix of drugs, including anticancer agents, psychiatric drugs, and anti-inflammatory compounds. "Levels of prescription drugs that we have leaving sewage-treatment plants in Canada are sometimes higher than what's being seen in Germany," he says.

He explains that many North American cities employ more rudimentary sewage treatment than those in Germany. Daughton observes also that some 1 million U.S. homes send their essentially untreated sewage directly into the environment.

MORE at http://www.organicconsumers.org/toxic/drugsinwater.cfm

Y'all REALLY want that stuff in your food? - (even cow's milk)

here's the results of my Google Search

Scary ain't it??

[NNadir]

11. This is probably a function of improved detection.

Many medications can now be detected in picomolar concentrations. This was probably not true 20 years ago.

[ConcernedCanuk]

12. AND - a lot more people are on pharmaceuticals than 20 years ago, no??

.
.
.

We have a MASSIVE marketing community when it comes to prescription drugs

Google "pharmaceutical terrorism"

THEN you may realize why especially the American government throws pot-smokers in jail.

Marijuana soothes pain, helps with glaucoma, handles stress, etc., etc., etc., -

and NEVER killed anyone!

Almost ALL pharmaceuticals have a "trade-off" value in "lives saved vs. deaths"

Sorta like what the US military calls "collateral damage"

(sigh)

[NNadir]

15. I don't know that I agree with that.

Aspirin to my mind is a wonder drug. The fact that aspirin is not more widely used is a function of the fact that no one is interested in marketing it. Personally, I try to take aspirin for most of the conditions it treats.

I also agree that much pharmaceutical marketing is inappropriate. Aspirin is a better drug than Vioxx ever was, and it does pretty much the same thing. Aspirin is cheaper and safer as well.

I'm not sure I think the same thing about marijuana, and I'm not speaking from ignorance here. I grew up in the sixties and seventies, and hope my kids don't ever smoke pot.

One of the few places where I'd identify myself as having libertarian instincts would be in the area of drug laws. I favor decriminalization of all drugs, including marijuana. But this is not the same as saying that pot (or heroin) is good for you.

I guarantee you this: If marijuana were as popular as aspirin, you would be able to detect THC is the sewage, just as you can detect other drugs.

[Nihil]

19. Heh!

> If marijuana were as popular as aspirin, you would be able to
> detect THC is the sewage, just as you can detect other drugs.

Visions of really dreamy cows, local milk becoming a designer drink,
lots of rare steak ... it's the ideal solution to both the "people
calming" problem and the anti-smoking laws ... yeah!

:smoke:

[XemaSab]

21. Salycilic acid! Quelle horreur!

Obviously a substance NEVER found in nature!

[NNadir]

22. Mmmmm. Oil of Wintergreen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methyl_salicylate

[Odin2005]

20. Ugh, stupid NIMBYist city people. totally irrational.

Peole can be such morons, if you tell then that the purified water they are drinking was originally sewage they won't drink it, as if it still retains some "essence" of dirtiness. This is similar to that craziness, city people disconncected from reality.

[hunter]

23. Acccccckkkk! Just do it right.

Ferret out industries dumping toxins into the sewers, recycle the water, digest the sludge, and put it someplace it won't cause trouble.

There, you are done. (Properly cleaning up after yourself always takes a little bit of effort.)

It's not some kind of mystery technology.