Skip to content

New Study shows Grand Rapids drinking water has toxicity levels that can cause harm

February 28, 2013

Picture 2

Much of this article is re-posted from the Environmental Working Group.

A new Environmental Working Group analysis of 2011 water quality tests by 201 large U.S. municipal water systems that serve more than 100 million people in 43 states has determined that all are polluted with unwanted toxic chemicals called trihalomethanes. These chemicals, an unintended side effect of chlorination, elevate the risks of bladder cancer, miscarriages and other serious ills.

“Many people are likely exposed to far higher concentrations of trihalomethanes than anyone really knows,” said Renee Sharp, a senior scientist at EWG and co-author of the analysis. “For most water systems, trihalomethane contamination fluctuates from month to month, sometimes rising well beyond the legal limit set by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.”

Trihalomethanes are formed when chlorine, added to treated water as a disinfectant, reacts with rotting organic matter such as farm runoff, sewage or dead animals and vegetation. Their concentrations tend to rise when storms increase organic pollution in waters that serve as sources for tap water.

Scientists suspect that trihalomethanes in drinking water may cause thousands of cases of bladder cancer every year. These chemicals also have been linked to colon and rectal cancer, miscarriages, birth defects and low birth weight.

Only one of the systems studied by EWG—Davenport, Iowa—xceeded the EPA’s upper legal limit of 80 parts per billion of trihalomethanes in drinking water. Since that regulation was issued in 1998, a significant body of scientific research has developed evidence that these chemicals cause serious disorders at much lower concentrations. Among the research are two Taiwanese studies conducted in 2007 and 2012 that associated increased risks of bladder cancer and stillbirth to long-term consumption of tap water with trihalomethane contamination greater than 21 parts per billion. Some 168 of systems, or 84 percent of the 201 large systems studied, reported average annual concentrations greater than that level.

According to the study, the Grand Rapids water system has Total Trihalomethane annual average in part per billion 37.6 and 26.0 part per billion of Haloacetic Acids. Both of these numbers are on the higher end of the spectrum of the 201 cities tested by the Environmental Working Group.

The EPA regulates four members of the trihalomethane family, the best known of which is chloroform, once used as an anesthetic and, in pulp detective stories, to knock out victims. Today, the U.S. government classifies chloroform as a “probable” human carcinogen. California health officials consider it a “known” carcinogen. The EPA does not regulate hundreds of other types of toxic contaminants formed by water treatment chemicals. Among these unregulated but dangerous chemicals are nitrosamines, which are formed when a chloramine, a chlorine compound used for water treatment, reacts with organic matter. In 2010, then-EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson launched a drinking water initiative that committed the agency to investigate nitrosamine contamination. The U.S. government considers some chemicals in the nitrosamine family to be “reasonably anticipated” to be human carcinogens.Picture 3

Clean source water is critical to breaking this cycle. The EPA has found that every dollar spent to protect source water reduced water treatment costs by an average of $27 dollars.

“We must do a better job of keeping farm runoff, sewage and other pollutants from getting into our drinking water in the first place,” said Sharp. “By failing to do so, Congress, the EPA and polluters leave no choice for water utilities but to treat dirty water with chemical disinfectants. Americans are left to drink dangerous residual chemicals generated by the treatment process.”

Environmental Working Group (EWG) is calling on federal officials to:

  • Reform farm policies to provide more funds to programs designed to keep agriculture pollutants, such as manure, fertilizer, pesticides and soil out of tap water.
  • Renew the conservation compliance provision by tying wetland and soil protection requirements to crop insurance programs and requiring farm businesses who receive subsidies to update their conservation plans.
  • Strengthen and adequately fund conservation programs that reward farmers who take steps to protect sources of drinking water.
  • Fund more research on the identity of and toxicological profiles for hundreds of water treatment contaminants in drinking water.
  • Reevaluate the measurement of water treatment contaminants so that consumers cannot be legally exposed to spikes of toxic chemicals.
  • Expand source water protection programs to prevent and reduce pollution and to conserve land in buffer zones around public water supplies.

To reduce exposure to trihalomethane and many other pollutants in drinking water, EWG recommends consumers use a water filter system. EWG has released its online water filter guide, which helps consumers figure out which filter is best for themselves and their families.

2 Comments leave one →
  1. Robert Whitesides permalink
    February 28, 2013 5:14 pm

    I recommend looking at some of the International Joint Commission (IJC) discussions on “sunsetting” the use of chlorine in the Great Lakes Basin:

    This document provides an overview in the introduction:
    “The International Joint Commission is a binational treaty organization with the
    responsibility to report on progress in achieving the goals and objectives of the Canada-US Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The UC’s biennial reports on Great Lakes Water Quality are issued in response to this obligation. One of the goals of the Agreement, established in Article II of the 1978 revisions, is to virtually eliminate persistent toxic chemicals from the Great Lakes.Half of the 362 synthetically-produced chemical compounds that were found in the Great Lakes basin were chlorinated organics (MESB 1994).”

    The document seems to provide a good review of all the factors involved: industry, public health, etc. I have not read it, but understand many of the basic arguments. Chlorine is essentially a by-product of caustic soda manufacturing and has been used in water treatment because it is cheap. I believe that the French abandoned chlorine because of the organohaline problems and treat most of their water with oxygen or ozone. The main problem is maintaining purity of water after it leaves the treatment facility which usually means ensuring a residual level in distribution piping which can be subject to contamination.

    This document is older, so searching more recent IJC documents may be worthwhile for the interested.

    Robert Whitesides
    Kalamazoo River Watershed Council

  2. Doug Burkholder permalink
    March 11, 2013 10:45 pm

    Well being in skilled trades al of my life I can say with out a doubt the many many chemicals along with those above are currently being used in industry ,in the air and onto absorbent compounds and being thrown in trash dumpsters and out the back doors going into landfills and aquifers . If you want to keep your job you say nothing !
    We have advanced so much as Humans haven’t we !

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: