According to a press release by the EPA, “ENLACE has established and implemented a land use and comprehensive development plan that works to improve social, economic, and environmental conditions for 8 communities in the Cano Martin Pen Special Planning District.”

Poverty has been a threat to environmental sustainability in San Juan since the early twentieth century. Mass migrations of individuals and families to San Juan resulted in settlements being erected in the mangroves along the canal.

The Cano Martin Pena is a 3.5 mile long canal located in the San Juan Bay (SJB). The San Juan Bay is part of the National Estuary Program of the EPA. The Cano Martin Pena is so important because it connects the San Juan Bay and the San Jose Lagoon.

Toxins, pollution, and sedimentation in the Cano Martin Pena would have grave implications for the SJB and the San Jose Lagoon. Instituting policies and effective plans to mitigate the adverse affects of urbanization and lack of infrastructural development in the canal is key to controlling for damages in the region.

ENLACE is working toward water quality improvement in the Cano Martin Pena in several ways. Firstly, ENLACE partnered with the SJB National Estuary to test water quality in the canal. They are also working with the Ponce School of Medicine to study epidemiological data on the effects of residents’ repeated exposure to water polluted by sewage.

In terms of the Cano Martin Pena, private and public entities must cooperate on an immediate action plan for change in the canal. Protecting human health and ensuring economic development by conserving the environment is integral to seeing a more sustainable Puerto Rico in the twenty-first century.

Environmental justice is unique. It is difficult to enforce and almost impossible to incriminate. Yet, environmental injustice arguably puts more people at health, social, and economic risks than other crimes with more temporary affects.

Until effective systems are in place to  punish those who obstruct environmental justice, rewards for those who uphold it are crucial to protecting natural resources.

With the work of ENLACE, lives of local residents and inhabitants affected by poor quality water in the Cano Martin Pena will be changed for the better. And isn’t it by saving lives that we save the world?

The photo above is a picture of La Fortaleza in San Juan Bay

If you are interested in this article, you should also read:

Did Justice Prevail? Inequity in Fines Paid for Oil Spill

Underwater Forensics is Solving Sea Crimes

A Long Time Coming: Coastal Access in Bolivia

Using Flickr to Save the World

Water for Steamy Hot Cocoa: Hot or Not?

Updating bathroom fixtures and installing more efficient toilets could save water and money spent on costly water bills. The EPA partnership program with WaterSense encourages end users to install updated toilets that would be a cost-efficient courtesy flush for water conservation.

According to the EPA, installing WaterSense Labeled toilets could save the average American home nearly 4,000 gallons of water per year. That equates to a total savings of $90 per year on water bills and $2,000 over the lifetime of the toilet. And in this economy, no one can afford to flush money down the drain.

New efficient toilets save up to 20 percent less water than stipulated by the current federal standard on water use in toilet flushing. Save the world’s water and a few extra dollars by retrofitting your bathroom with WaterSense label products or a waterless composting toilet.

The idea of installing a waterless composting toilet might be unsettling for the average home owner. But the company Biolet offers an array of waterless products that are environmentally and budget friendly.

End users and home owners need to understand that saving water is as important as saving every nickel and dime when financial times are taking a toll on the family budget. Since a penny saved is a penny earned, so is a gallon of water saved equal to a gallon of water earned.

Water use efficiency and updated bathroom fixtures should no longer be an option. If all households in America united in a courtesy flush movement, the total amount of water saved would equal 640 billion gallons, a tidy sum.

So will you and your family take the courtesy flush challenge? Will you retrofit your bathroom fixtures to use 20 percent less water than it takes to function now?

Of course, the courtesy flush challenge also includes making sure that every flush counts. Do not flush unconventional items or other garbage down the toilet. Flush responsibly.

If you enjoyed this article, you should also read:

Celebrities Raise Awareness About H20 Issues in Liberia

Do You Still Pitch Change Into Waterwells?

The Evolution of Sui-Ren: Water Ninja Techniques

Archaeological Finds of Captain Henry Morgan

The Wickedest City Under Water

There are several codes for water quality control in beauty products. There are also various types of water, including distilled and thermal water, that are in high demand as major cosmetic ingredients.

Consumer safety is a key concern for companies producing beauty products. Billions of dollars are spent on beauty products that are used by Americans every single day. So who is working to keep us safe? Why is water such a sensitive ingredient?

Water quality in beauty products is largely monitored by the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Guidance on Cosmetic Manufacturing Practices.

Only water that does not test positive for toxins, microbes and other pollutants can be used in beauty products. Standards set forth by the FDA, the USP, and the EPA are crucial to protecting consumers who purchase and use beauty supplies on a daily basis.

The Good Manufacturing Practices outlined by the FDA are guidelines for water quality. Other companies use the U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) standards for ensuring consumer safety with respect to water quality in beauty products.

In the beauty industry, a product is only as good as the water used to make it.

If you enjoyed this article, you should also read:

Archaeological Finds of Captain Henry Morgan

The Wickedest City Under Water

UNESCO Works to Preserve Nautical Archaeology

Nautical Archaeology Threatened by Trawlers

Ancient Rainwater Tunnel Found in Jerusalem

The Golden Coast lost some of its luxury status as a consequence. According to a report in the L.A. Times, hundreds of gallons of waste runoff polluted the ocean due to the storm. Gary Brown, Executive Director of the nonprofit Orange Country Coastkeeper, confirmed that viruses, toxic metals, trash and debris polluted the coast because the municipal sewage systems could not handle the flooding.

Water quality advocates are outraged by the safety threat posed by the leak in southern California’s sewage systems. In fact, Brown asserted that if reports confirm that sewage runoff could have been avoided by updating water infrastructure, the group will file a complaint.

Aging water infrastructure continues to undermine health and environmental concerns in the United States. Interestingly, in 2010, California was the highest recipient of national water infrastructure maintenance funds (9.35 percent) with $126 Million awarded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),.

The southern California sewage runoff issue was not a sudden crisis that occurred from a random confluence of events. Preparation for extreme weather conditions like a major flood was at best minimal in the region. If follow up reports indicate that aging water infrastructure was a factor in southern California’s sewage runoff disaster, a thorough investigation of funding and project implementation may be sought.

Some parts of the world are in crisis from not having enough water. Other parts of the world are deluged by amounts that they aren’t prepared for. Disaster relief and emergency response to overwhelmed sewage systems are symptoms of an endemic condition plaguing major U.S. cities—aging water infrastructure.

As experts analyze the southern California sewage crisis, sustainable development strategies can include a comprehensive maintenance plan for municipal sewage systems. Advocacy groups like the Ocean County Coastkeeper are at the forefront of systemic change in the region, advocating for legislation and public policy enforcement.

In sum, allocating funds for water infrastructure is only a drop in the bucket of resolving water management dilemmas in the U.S. Consistent monitoring of these structures is necessary for the safety of people and the environment.

Unfortunately, an unprecedented catastrophe often occurs before awareness is raised about fundamental water concerns. Then, subsequent action can gather greater support and the development process can begin overtime. Since all eyes are on California, results may advance the cause before the next natural disaster occurs in California and around the nation.

If you enjoyed this article, you should also read:

Water for Agribusiness or Endangered Species in California?

Fracking Up the Chesapeake Bay

No Hexavalent Chromium in My Tap Water Please

Lead Found in New York City Tap Water

Environmentalist groups, including the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, are concerned that hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” is an underlying cause of contamination in the groundwater. Fracking is a process for natural gas drilling. The process includes injecting chemicals and other fluids into rocks that are far beneath the water surface. Fracking has contaminated drinking water in other parts of the United States and the EPA is researching if fracking in the Chesapeake will contaminate ground water further.

Fracking for natural gas is appealing because of high needs for gas in the North East. However, there is empirical evidence that indicates the dangers of fracking to human health and water safety. Fracking contaminates drinking water and also threatens animal and human life.

The Marcellus Formation is an underground natural gas reserve that extends from New York to Pennsylvania and into West Virginia. In April of 2010, the Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. was prohibited from fracking in the state of Pennsylvania until wells were plugged accordingly to keep runoff from contaminating local water supplies. It was believed that fracking by Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. led to the contamination of drinking water in 14 homes in Dimock Township, PA.

The population of blue crabs in the Chesapeake Bay is low and fracturing may be part of the reason for the decrease in the numbers of blue crabs. Recently, reports about the blue crab population in the Chesapeake Bay indicate that there has been an increase in blue crabs. But, that could be partially due to agreements made by fishermen in Virginia and Maryland to decrease the amount of female blue crabs caught. The slow recovery of the blue crab industry may suffer negative consequences if fracking continues in the Chesapeake.

In the water world, issues of pollution, economics, and energy development collide as these industries compete for water resources in local areas. Holding government agencies accountable to implementing effective water testing and monitoring policies is essential the preservation of the Chesapeake Bay and other bodies of water.

The slow recovery of the Chesapeake Bay will continue as organizations like the Chesapeake Bay Foundation gain ground for restorative and protective policies.

WWW would like your thoughts:

W ill these policies favor energy development initiatives, which could boost local economies and introduce a new energy market in the Northeast?

Will policies favor the public health of American citizens and the conservation of wetland areas?

Will environmentalists concerns about contaminated ground water overshadow drilling for natural gas?

Or will endeavors to explore alternative energy solutions take precedence over clean water for human consumption?

If you enjoyed this article, you should also read:

Water for Agribusiness or Endangered Species in California?

The Global Water Tool Makes for Sound Business Practice

Baiheliang: The World’s Ancient Hydrological Station

No Hexavalent Chromium in My Tap Water Please!

Reports indicate that a national safety level for hex chrom in tap water is not yet established. Moreover, public utility agencies are not required to test for it. Essentially, there is no system in place to punish the guilty or protect the innocent in terms of hex chrom exposure in tap water.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Chromium is released to the environment from natural and anthropogenic sources, with the largest releases occurring from industrial sources.” The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) lists standards and policies regarding hex chrom exposure in the workplace. But, similar directives are not applied to utilities providing tap water to end users in the U.S.

Interestingly, bottled water suppliers are not required to test for hex chrom either. So, avoiding hex chrom exposure is out of the hands of the buyer. How can policy makers even up the odds for the average American who doesn’t work in an industrial setting, but clearly wants to avoid hex chrom exposure at all costs?

In light of EWG’s report, perhaps the category of corporate social responsibility (CSR) for water utility providers will expand to include hex chrom testing. Major corporations invest heavily in CSR and sustainability programs but shouldn’t water safety be included in these endeavors?

If utility providers are not forced to abide by national hex chrom safety standards, then municipal water infrastructure projects should develop systems that filter for toxic chemicals like hex chrom. Traces of toxic chemicals like lead and hex chrom are indicative that aging water infrastructure and out-moded legislation regulations need to be restructured in the U.S.

At present, hex chrom can be filtered using reverse osmosis filters on the home tap. But replacing these filters costs $200. In the economic times of the country, spending $200 on a reverse osmosis filter may not be feasible for many families.

Issues pertaining to water contamination effect industrialized and developing countries alike. The latter faces immediate consequences from unclean drinking water and poor sanitation, with high mortality rates from water-borne diseases. The former deals with long-term consequences from hex chrom exposure, with individuals suffering from stomach and gastrointestinal cancers.

Research studies and statistics on the rates of toxic chemicals in tap water is the first step in protecting end users against them. If tap water users are unaware of toxic trace levels in drinking water, they are powerless to lobby for change to protect their water supply.

Working on water problems includes updating aging water infrastructure, holding utility companies accountable for trace levels of toxicants and informing consumers about the contents of tap water. In the U.S., tap water users take drinking water safety for granted. But as the EWG study reveals, water concerns are on tap in the U.S. as well.

Do you live in one of the cities where hex chrom was found in the tap water supply?

Would you invest in the reverse osmosis filter to protect your tap water against hex chrom and other toxins?

If you enjoyed this article, you should also read:

Lead Found in New York City Water Tap Water?

World Bank Invests in Water Management in Uzbekistan

Empowering Women with Water

New York City (NYC) tap water was recently found with lead levels that exceeded federal regulations set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Lead is toxic to toddlers and pregnant women. In a sample of 222 homes in NYC, fourteen percent of homes were found with unsafe lead levels in the tap water.

In a city populated by roughly 8,400,000 people, access to uncontaminated tap water is essential to public health and safety. In 2007, NYC was awarded a 10 year Filtration Avoidance Determination by the EPA. The Determination marks the work of the comprehensive New York City Watershed Protection Program and is the reason why NYC does not need to filter its tap water.

Overall, NYC is world renowned for its effectiveness in water quality. Hence, the lead water finding in NYC tap water is of concern to city residents and raises questions about water quality and management practices in NY State.

NYS public drinking water is regulated by EPA guidelines which set parameters for safe drinking water standards in the U.S. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was passed by Congress in 1974 to protect drinking water for. The SWDA was amended twice thereafter. The 1996 amendment included water resource protection guidelines to ensure that tap water was protected from the source to the tap.

The Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) was established in 1996 by the amended SDWA. The DWSRF grants funds to States for water system enhancement and development. The funds are awarded based on information gathered from water system surveys.

For the 2010 fiscal year, New York State was allocated $89, 427,000 to finance water infrastructure maintenance, representing 6.59 percent of government funds available to States. New York was the second highest recipient of funds after California, the State that received $126, 958, 000 or 9.35 percent of funds available to states.

In the instance of increased lead levels in NYC tap water, reports indicated that the higher lead levels were found in older buildings. Time has weathered the City’s water networks and outdated others. Drinking water infrastructure in the U.S was mostly built in the 1970’s.

In New York, drinking water infrastructure needs to be rehabilitated. With the funds awarded by the DWSRF, New York State could invest in sustainable development water programs to safeguard against water contamination and increased lead levels. The EPA recognizes that infrastructure rehabilitation and sustainable development strategies must be executed to ensure the health of tap water consumers. Water treatment plants, storage facilities and improved pipelining will protect New York tap water from source to tap.

Even in a city like New York that is known for its quality drinking water, development work still needs to be done. With Federal funding, regular water testing and water contaminant regulation, NYC will be safeguarded against Federal violations and protect the well being of tap water consumers.

The attention of the public nonetheless shifted in that direction when in 2002, the World Health Organization described the situation of Bangladesh as  “the world’s largest mass poisoning of a population in history” (Source: http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/charles-harvey-water-detective-20153/). The local population suffered from skin problems and elevated risk of contracting skin, liver or kidney cancer in the next decade. The situation in Bangladesh combined with the American controversies instigated scientists and scholars to investigate further into the question of arsenic and potable water. Charles f. Harvey, an MIT professor, of environmental engineering decided to investigate further into the matter by trying to understand the causes of such a high concentration of arsenic.  After receiving a grant from the National Science Foundation, Harvey, also nicknamed the water detective, decided to focus on the area of Mushiganj in Bangladesh. After various analysis done on location, Harvey discovered that arsenic concentration reached their highest point at a depth of around 30 meters under the ground; “unfortunately, the same level at which many tube well drew their drinking water” (Source: http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/charles-harvey-water-detective-20153/). He decided to ask for the collaboration of his students from MIT in order to solve the mystery.

After numerous observations, Harvey and his staff realized that rice fields where most of the population worked, where filtering arsenic out of the water. After having tested the rice field water, Harvey came to the realization that the water was actually clean. After a chemical analysis of the underground reservoirs, the MIT professor came to the realization that “ water from the manmade ponds was seeping into the ground, carrying organic carbon. Once the organic material was deep underground, bacteria broke it down, usin iron oxide and releasing arsenic. Due to a lack of funding, technical problems and the complexity of the study, it took seven years for the team of experts to come to these useful conclusions.  Harvey’s discovery marks an important step for Bangladesh but could also serve to the sustainable development done in other countries suffering from similar problems. By raising awareness, the water detective also forced the government in Bangladesh to take responsibility and respond to this issue of contaminated water. The country’s financial minister, Abul Maal Abdul Muhith, publicly promised “that his government would the nation arsenic free by 2013” (Source: http://www.miller-mccune.com/science/charles-harvey-water-detective-20153/). While for now this remains a simple promise, for the future there is hope of an actual concrete sustainable strategy.

Charles Harvey, the water detective, proved that with the necessary drive and motivation, a single individual can make a real difference. His contribution is forcing the world of international aid and development to face the water problems in Bangladesh. Harvey is still committed to making a difference in Bangladesh and wants to continues research in order to ameliorate the conditions of the people in Bangladesh.

Washington’s lakes and water streams are so polluted that citizens and local fish restaurants are having problems to find the needed supply from their own water streams.  For many individuals, especially native people and tribes, fish is at the core of their daily diet: “for the Swinomish of La Conner and other tribes in Washington, local game and seafood are an integral part of every funeral, birthday celebration or other family gathering” (Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012448836_tribalfish26m.html ). In 2002, this tribe received a considerable grant from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to finance a research study for selfish and crabs. The alarming results presented a large quantity of carcinogens like dioxins and PCBs. Toxins dumped in the sea have reached the organs of the fish that now contain a dangerous amount of mercury’ trout are contaminated with alarming level of DDT while shellfish infected with PCBs. The situation is so that there is enough quality fish in the waters for people in the state to have only one portion of fish every month. “Because toxic contaminants accumulate in fish tissue, part of the federal Clean water Act requires that state waters be clean enough for local residents to safely consume certain amounts of fish: The greater the amount eaten, the cleaner the water must be” (Source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2012448836_tribalfish26m.html). If federal states fail to determine the average quantity of fish eaten by their population, the EPA imposes a representative quality of 6.5 grams of fish daily.

The problem with mercury is that there is no way to see it or smell it, therefore a fisherman has no way to determine the quality of the resources. Even the smallest amount of mercury can damage the brain of younger children and leave them with long going learning disabilities. In larger amounts mercury also harms older adults causing numbness or change in vision. It is impossible to clean the fish from the mercury since it gets directly into the flesh of the animal. “By removing the skin and cutting away other fatty areas of the fish, you may reduce other types of contaminants (Such as PCBs and dioxins) that can be in fatty tissue” (Source: http://des.nh.gov/organization/divisions/water/wmb/swqa/2008/documents/appendix_27).

The ocean is a precious resource for humankind and the source of life of many communities who live by the sea side. Fishing is crucial to the world’s economy. The lakes of America are starting to be so polluted that fishermen and restaurants are starting to feel threatened. Fish contain an alarming quantity of mercury, a dose that is dangerous to human beings. If rigorous  measures aren’t taken rapidly the situation could get worst, millions of people could lose their jobs and others could get intoxicated by fish poising. Nature and its oceans demand and deserve respect for everything they provide to us in exchange.