And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

http://www.wln.com/~crc/issues/sludge.html
The HarperCollins Dictionary of Environmental Science defines sludge as a
"viscous, semisolid mixture of bacteria- and virus-laden organic matter, toxic
metals, synthetic organic chemicals, and settled solids removed from domestic
and industrial waste water at a sewage treatment plant." [10] Over 60,000
toxic
substances and chemical compounds can be found in sewage sludge, and
scientists are developing 700 to 1,000 new chemicals per year. Stephen
Lester of
the Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous Wastes has compiled information from
researchers at Cornell University and the American Society of Civil Engineers
showing that sludge typically contains the following toxins: 

 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs); 

 Chlorinated pesticides -- DDT, dieldrin, aldrin, endrin, chlordane,
heptachlor,
lindane, mirex, kepone, 2,4,5-T, 2,4-D; 

 Chlorinated compounds such as dioxins; 

 Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons; 

 Heavy metals -- arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury; 

 Bacteria, viruses, protozoa, parasitic worms, fungi; and 

 Miscellaneous -- asbestos, petroleum products, industrial solvents. [11] 

In addition, a 1994 investigation by the US General Accounting Office found
that
"the full extent of the radioactive contamination of sewage sludge, ash and
related
by-products nationwide is unknown." Most of the radioactive material is
flushed
down the drain by hospitals, businesses and decontamination laundries, a
practice
which has contaminated at least nine sewage plants in the past decade. [12] 


In 1977, EPA Administrator Douglas Costle estimated that by 1990 treatment
plants would be generating 10 million tons of sludge per year, a thought that
"gives us all a massive environmental headache." [13] Today there are about
15,000 publicly-owned wastewater treatment works in the United States,
discharging approximately 26 billion gallons per day of treated wastewater
into
lakes, streams and waterways. Before treatment, this wastewater contains
over a
million pounds of hazardous components. Sewage plants use heat, chemicals and
bacterial treatments to detoxify 42 percent of these components through
biodegradation. Another 25 percent escapes into the atmosphere, and 19 percent
is discharged into lakes and streams. The remaining 14 percent --
approximately
28 million pounds per year -- winds up in sewage sludge. [14] 

Once created, this sludge must be disposed of in some fashion. The available
methods include: incineration (which releases pollution into the air),
dumping into
landfills (which is expensive, and often lets contaminants leach into
groundwater),
and ocean dumping (where it has created vast underwater dead seas). A fourth
approach -- gasification, using sludge to generate methanol or energy -- is
favored
by EPA's Hugh Kaufman as the "most environmentally sound approach, but also
the most expensive." [15] A fifth approach -- using sludge as plant
fertilizer --
was considered hazardous to health and the environment until the 1970s, but it
has the advantage of being inexpensive. As budget concerns mounted in the late
1970s, the EPA began to pressure sewage plants to adopt the cheapest method
available -- spreading sludge on farm fields. [16] 

A Rose By Any Other Name

To educate the public at large about the benefits of sludge, the EPA turned to
Nancy Blatt's employer, known today as the "Water Environment Federation."
Although its name evokes images of cascading mountain streams, the WEF is
actually the sewage industry's main trade, lobby and public relations
organization,
with over 41,000 members and a multi-million-dollar budget that supports a
100-
member staff. Founded in 1928 as the "Federation of Sewage Works
Associations," the organization in 1950 recognized the growing significance of
industrial waste in sludge by changing its name to the "Federation of
Sewage and
Industrial Wastes Associations." In 1960, it changed its name again to the
cleaner-sounding "Water Pollution Control Federation." [17] 

In 1977, Federation director Robert Canham criticized the EPA's enthusiasm for

land application of sludge, which he feared could introduce viruses into
the food
chain. "The results can be disastrous," he warned. [18] By the 1990s, however,
Federation members were running out of other places to put the stuff. The
Federation became an eager supporter of land farming, and even organized a
contest among its members to coin a nicer-sounding name for sludge. 

The proposal to create a "Name Change Task Force" originated with Peter
Machno, manager of Seattle's sludge program, after protesters mobilized
against
his plan to spread sludge on local tree farms. "If I knocked on your door
and said
I've got this beneficial product called sludge, what are you going to say?" he
asked. At Machno's suggestion, the Federation newsletter published a
request for
alternative names. Members sent in over 250 suggestions, including "all
growth,"
"purenutri," "biolife," "bioslurp," "black gold," "geoslime," "sca-doo,"
"the end
product," "humanure," "hu-doo," "organic residuals," "bioresidue," "urban
biomass," "powergro," "organite," "recyclite," "nutri-cake" and "ROSE,"
short for
"recycling of solids environmentally." [19] In June of 1991, the Name Change
Task Force finally settled on "biosolids," which it defined as the
"nutrient-rich,
organic byproduct of the nation's wastewater treatment process." [20] 

The new name attracted sarcastic comment from the Doublespeak Quarterly
Review, edited by Rutgers University professor William Lutz. "Does it still
stink?" Lutz asked. He predicted that the new name "probably won't move into
general usage. It's obviously coming from an engineering mentality. It does
have
one great virtue, though. You think of `biosolids' and your mind goes
blank." [21]

According to Machno, the name change was not intended to "cover something up
or hide something from the public. . . . We're trying to come up with a
term . . .
that can communicate to the public the value of this product that we spend an
awful lot of money on turning into a product that we use in a beneficial way."
[22] 
<<END EXCERPT

<<<<=-=-=FREE LEONARD PELTIER=-=-=>>>> 
If you think you are too small to make a difference;
try sleeping in a closed room with a mosquito....
African Proverb
<<<<=-=http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ =-=>>>> 
IF it says:
"PASS THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW...."
Please Check it before you send it at:

http://urbanlegends.miningco.com/library/blhoax.htm

Reply via email to