Purified sewage is unpalatable
18 April 2007
In March this year, Jim Service, the chairman of water supply company Actew Corporation, and councillors from the Australian city of Canberra dutifully drank bottles of purified sewage water as they unveiled plans to recycle part of the city’s wastewater into tapwater.
Within days, Professor Peter Collignon, director of infectious diseases and microbiology at the Canberra Hospital, wrote an open letter laying out his concerns about the health implications of the scheme.
What assurance could there be, he asked, that treatment would remove all disease-causing bacteria and viruses, as well as hormones and pharmaceutical compounds present in sewage?
It is a good question. As Antoine Frerot, chief executive of Paris-based global water champion Veolia Water, observes: “Louis Pasteur said 150 years ago that we drink 90 per cent of our illnesses. That is why water treatment was created.”
Around the world, water companies and their equipment suppliers insist we have the technology to render sewage safe to drink – but they don’t all guarantee they can pick up hormones or unexpected compounds. “This is an area in which we and others are doing a lot of research,” says Roger Radke, chief executive of Warrendale, Pennsylvania-based Siemens Water Technologies.
Microfiltration through polymer membranes, followed by reverse osmosis through membranes can remove even viruses if a small enough pore size is specified, says Mr Radke, though to drink the water, you had better then pass it under ultra-violet light to be sure to kill microscopic parasites such as cryptosporidium and giardia.
But this adds expense. In reality, the level of treatment is dictated by standards that have been deemed necessary by regulators for the intended use. And when deployed, it typically comes at the back-end of the traditional waste-water treatment process.
In the case of Canberra, waste water would be treated in the conventional way with chemical and bacteriological processes to remove solids and create water of the quality that is typically released back into rivers around the world.
Actew says it is still investigating exactly which processes the water would then undergo before being pumped into the supply reservoir. It says it would expect to use a combination of micro-filtration and ultrafiltration to remove microscopic particles, contaminants and pathogens; reverse osmosis to remove salts, organic compounds and viruses; and ultra-violet disinfection/oxidation to additionally ensure any trace of organic material is destroyed. A final option is to let the water flow through an artificial marshland before joining the reservoir.
After that, the reservoir water would pass through an existing treatment plant before entering the tapwater distribution system.
Canberra, like many Australian towns, is short of water because of a drought that has proved longer, and more severe, than anyone forecast. Last year, residents of Toowoomba, Queensland, rejected proposals for a similar waste water-to-tapwater scheme in a referendum in which health concerns played a key role. The Canberra proposals could prove equally contentious.
Veolia’s Mr Frerot says: “To my knowledge, there are only two places in the world where treated waste water is gradually mixed into tapwater: the town of Windhoek, in Namibia, and Singapore.”
In Windhoek, that is because the river is more polluted than the waste water, he says. In Singapore, it is a political choice designed to reduce depend ence on supplies from neighbouring Malaysia – and accounts for less than 1 per cent of water consumed.
Yet all around the world, city populations consume treated water drawn from rivers that receive treated wastewater from communities further upstream. Just as the citizens of Rouen, in France, drink the waste water of Parisians, the same is true in the River Thames in the UK, the Colorado in the US, and the Rhine in Germany and its neighbours. Without wastewater, these rivers would almost run dry.
Treatment prior to drinking is imperative: a 2003 study found the level of hormones in the River Seine sufficient to change the gender of some of its fish. And a study by the Netherlands government found that using Dutch rainwater even to flush toilets would pose a health risk.
If we are going to drink treated wastewater, says Mr Frerot, the best strategy, where geological conditions permit, is to reinject it into aquifers – as happens in Berlin and Adelaide. The soil acts as a natural filter, and the time-lag provides additional water for abstraction in periods of peak summer demand. Man is merely shortening the natural cycle.
Otherwise the most obvious and economically viable solution, he suggests, is to use treated waste water for industry and irrigation. Orange County, in California, adopted Siemens’ microfiltration and reverse osmosis to treat waste water a decade ago, initially reinjecting it into aquifers, and subsequently selling additional supplies to farmers and industry – which covers the cost of the additional treatment, says Mr Radke.
In Australia and elsewhere, some towns have a second distribution system for “reticulated” water used by householders for garden watering and washing cars.
Meantime, treated sewage water is widely used to supply industry, farms and golf courses, freeing up “natural” supplies for tapwater. Veolia alone has 100 such facilities in France, and others scattered from Honolulu to Durban in South Africa.
Dégremont, a Suez Environment subsidiary, cleans wastewater from Grasse, France’s perfume capital, to bathing standards, says Dégremont chief operating officer Remi Lantier, providing water quality guarantees for fish farms downstream.
Pumping treated waste water into marshlands and reed beds, where sunlight and plants complete the purification, is an option too. But the outfall from even a small town would require a vast swamp to be effective.
The simplest solution for small communities, says Mr Radke, is to buy a Siemens skid-mounted modular unit – the size of a small car – for a few thousand, or tens of thousands of dollars, and turn waste water into irrigation quality water by passing it through membranes.
Dégremont’s Mr Lantier says companies like his can produce ultra-pure water in which the only molecules are H20. He likens the safety issue to that in the nuclear industry, standards are that stringent.
Globally, says Mr Lantier, only 45 per cent of the world’s collected waste water is treated. The most urgent priority is to treat the 55 per cent released untreated. Of that treated, 20m m3 a day is recycled – about 2 per cent. He expects that proportion to triple in coming decades.
Ultimately, says Mr Frerot, the most cost-effective solution to water shortages developing in many towns and cities must surely be to supply such treated waste water for use in industry and irrigation, in place of the tapwater used today. “That would halve the demand for natural water,” he says. “That is what we should do, before talking about drinking waste water.”
‘No’ to recycled water: Brisbane survey
May 10, 2007 - 6:12PM
The group behind a booklet which claims recycled water can kill people and change the sex of fish says 87 per cent of south-east Queenslanders oppose plans to drink purified waste water.
In March, about 400,000 copies of the booklet were distributed across Brisbane by campaigners who oppose a state government plan to use purified, recycled effluent as drinking water by the end of next year.
The booklet - an extension of the campaign that secured a “no” vote on introducing recycled water in Toowoomba last year - offered residents a chance to vote against the government’s plan.
Campaign spokesman and Toowoomba councillor Snow Manners on Thursday said around 5,000 people had returned the survey.
Of the 1,000 responses so far counted, 87 per cent were opposed to drinking recycled water, he said.
“It’s a lie to say that everybody supports it,” Mr Manners said.
“We want to stick (these results) into the face of the implementers and say ‘Look, don’t lie, come clean and if you don’t like our poll go out and do what you were going to do originally and let Queensland have a plebiscite on it’.”
In January, the Queensland government scrapped a planned $10 million poll on the introduction of recycled water into the drinking system, saying the drought left it with no choice.
In response, the group launched the booklet, Think before you agree to drink - Is sewage a source of drinking water?, which claims that recycled water can kill people, alter behaviour, reduce sperm counts, cause infertility among couples and boost liver cancer rates.
The government, which insists there is strong public support for purified recycled water, attacked the booklet as unscientific and dishonest misinformation that should be thrown in the bin.
Mr Manners said it was not too late to sway the government to change its mind, despite forging ahead with its $408 million recycled water pipeline project.
“I think we still do have enough time and enough clout to make the premier (Peter Beattie) do a backflip,” he said.
“It’s a really loony, stupid idea.
Meanwhile, the Queensland government has banned new water bores in parts of the state’s drought-hit south.
Queensland Water Minister Craig Wallace said the ban, which takes effect immediately, was needed to help protect underground aquifers which are under stress in the Toowoomba area and Brisbane’s south and west.
Drilling companies which defy the ban on bores face fines of up to $24,975.
The ban applies to the drilling of all new bores and enlarging existing bores in Toowoomba, and from Capalaba in Brisbane’s east to Wacol in the west.
The government is also considering other measures to control water use by owners of existing bores, including making them subject to the same water restrictions as the rest of the community.
Cleveland, Ohio water investigation
Two deal brokers with dirty hands manipulated Ohio water contracts
Nate Gray and Gilbert Jackson used a variety of sweeteners to ingratiate themselves with municipal officials: tickets to ballgames and Broadway shows, under-the-table payments, a $700 Louis Vuitton handbag. Gray had especially good connections in the Ohio suburb of East Cleveland. Gray and Jackson helped secure water and sewer contracts in Cleveland and East Cleveland for two of the nation’s most prominent engineering firms. Those deals became key elements in a federal racketeering investigation that eventually put the pair in prison. Jackson was a New Orleans-based senior vice president for the engineering firm Camp Dresser & McKee. He developed ties to Cleveland Mayor Mike White and was active in the U.S. Conference of Mayors, serving as co-chairman of its Mayors Business Council, created to promote “public-private partnerships.” Gray was a political supporter and close friend of White, Cleveland’s mayor from 1990 to 2002. Gray also helped CH2M Hill, a Colorado engineering firm, win a $3.9-million no-bid contract in 2002 to run East Cleveland’s water and sewer system. A CH2M subsidiary, Operations Management International Inc., also known as OMI, channeled cash payments to then-Mayor Emmanuel Onunwor through a front company, prosecutors said in court papers. They said OMI passed money to a Cleveland engineering firm that employed Gray as a subcontractor and Gray made payments to the mayor. Ralph Cascarilla, an attorney for OMI, said his company had no idea that consulting fees it paid the local firm were used to bribe the mayor. OMI has not been charged in the case. The story of Gray and Jackson offers a glimpse of the underside of the municipal water business. Los Angeles Times_ 5/29/06
Firms unaware of Cleveland, Ohio, bribes, companies say
An indictment unsealed this week in Cleveland takes aim at five people who federal prosecutors say accepted or handled bribes linked to consultant Nate Gray. But the cash sources for those bribes - large corporations with national operations - were not indicted. The companies say that the money they paid Gray was for consulting fees. The case revolves around cash paid by New Jersey-based Honeywell Inc., Denver-based CH2M Hill; and Massachusetts-based Camp, Dresser & McKee, all companies with diverse operations. The indictment says CH2M Hill paid Gray as much as $10,000 a month in fees while the firm had a contract to operate the East Cleveland water system. Gray bribed then-East Cleveland mayor Emmanuel Onunwor to keep the company’s contract, prosecutors said. A CH2M Hill lawyer said the business had no idea that Gray was paying bribes to Onunwor and would never have approved such a thing. Cleveland Plain Dealer_ 1/20/05
Prominent Cleveland consultant Nate Gray and five others indicted in federal probe of corruption in Ohio, New Orleans and Houston
The 45-count indictment charges Gray with creating a secret machine that corrupted public officials with cash, Super Bowl tickets, massages and limousines. Also charged were former Houston building department director Monique McGilbra, prominent Cleveland lawyer Ricardo Teamor, consultant Gilbert Jackson, former Honeywell Inc. salesman Brent Jividen and Cleveland City Councilman Joseph Jones. The indictment also accuses Gray of bribing then-East Cleveland mayor Emmanuel Onunwor involving a no-bid, $3.9 million contract with Denver-based CH2M Hill, which managed the water and sewer systems in East Cleveland starting in March 2002. According to federal prosecutors, CH2M Hill provided as much as $10,000 a month in consulting fees to Cleveland engineer Ralph Tyler, who carried the money to Gray, who used it for bribes. Attorneys for CH2M Hill and Tyler say their clients did not know the money was used for bribes. Cleveland Plain Dealer_ 1/19/05