Arlington's tap water is the cleanest among the nation's big cities, according to a study by a Washington, D.C.-based environmental advocacy group. The Environmental Working Group calculations released this weekend were based on testing conducted since 2004 that found 316 pollutants in U.S. drinking water systems. The rankings that put Arlington No. 1 took into account numbers and percentage of chemicals found in tap water and levels of pollutants compared to legal limits and national averages. Fort Worth finished third on the list, and Dallas was 12th. Plano was ranked 50th out of the 100 systems, and Houston was the sixth-worst among cities with populations of 250,000 and up, according to the study. "Arlington has always been proud of its drinking water," said Julie Hunt, the city's water utilities director. "Hearing this is affirmation of the hard work." She said she's not aware of any other system that ranks water utilities this way or combines data from so many sources. Hunt said she would need to study the research more before she could comment on how the data was analyzed. Jane Houlihan, senior vice president for research at the Environmental Working Group, said this is a one-of-a-kind database, and that's why the organization tackled this project. "We wanted to do it because the federal government doesn't," she said. "There is a huge need for a national look at tap water quality." The ratings, however, are not comprehensive. The Environmental Working Group did not have sufficient data to include seven large city water supplies, including San Francisco, Detroit and Washington, D.C. The study concludes that much more needs to be done nationwide to provide cleaner drinking water. It notes that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has enforceable tap water safety standards for a little more than one-third of the 316 pollutants found in the testing. This new study also seeks to go beyond the mandatory Consumer Confidence Report issued by water utilities. The researchers created a separate "Health Limit" category that is often well below the legal limits for individual contaminants. That category is based on 13 criteria from the EPA, U.S. Geological Survey and California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Charles Stringer, Dallas Water Utilities assistant director, said he wasn't sure how much weight to give to the health limit category created by the Environmental Working Group. He said the "jury is pretty much still out" on the effects of exposure to minute levels of some of those chemicals. "The only thing we can go by is the MCL [the federal government's maximum contaminant level], and we try to stay as far below that as we possibly can," he said. Despite questions about the methodology, Stringer said he's happy that Dallas finished near the top. The study points out what the Environmental Working Group sees as some of the cracks in the tap water system. Houlihan said governments spend 19 times as much on chemicals to treat source water as they do protecting it and keeping it clean. The news was not all bad, though. "We also found many utilities that are doing an admirable job protecting their reservoirs and treating water to levels that are safe to drink," Houlihan said. One example, she said, is Boston's reservoir, which is mostly surrounded by forestland. The forest keeps sources of pollutants away from the city's drinking water supply. Hunt said she enthusiastically agrees with the need to protect source water. She said the Tarrant Regional Water District, a supplier for Arlington and Fort Worth, does a good job with its reservoirs. The city is also working on a Lake Arlington master plan that will address ways to protect that water from pollution. Arlington also has been progressive in its use of technology, Hunt said. It started using ozone in its water treatment process a decade ago, which allows it to reduce the use of chlorine. The city also uses biological filters in which micro-organisms are used to eliminate pollutants. Stringer said Dallas also starts with clean water from its reservoirs, which gives it an advantage. According to the study, a large majority of contaminants found in Dallas water could be byproducts of the water processing and distribution process. By 2012, Stringer said Dallas expects to upgrade its water treatment systems to include biological filters. "This will allow us to drop our levels of organics [particles] to an even lower number and actually may even remove it," he said. On the other end, there are water systems that are starting with polluted water, and many of those chemicals remain even after it's treated. "People are drinking mixtures of contaminants with every glass of water," Houlihan said about some water systems. "We really found a wide range of water quality across the country." There need to be tougher federal rules, she said, but also residents in some areas should consider getting water filters. This is the second time in less than two years Arlington's water system attracted national attention. In March 2008, The Associated Pressreleased the results of a five-month investigation that found that Arlington's water – as well as many other water supplies nationwide – contained trace amounts of a pharmaceutical. The city is participating in research to determine if biological filters can screen out drugs and certain other contaminants. The chemical in Arlington's tap water was later identified as the anti-anxiety drug meprobamate. The AP investigation found traces of pharmaceuticals in the water of at least 41 million U.S. residents. The stories said there were no definitive findings about health risks, but some scientists were concerned about long-term exposure. Dallas, Arlington, Fort Worth rank among top 20 in tap water tests
12:00 AM CST on Sunday, December 13, 2009
To Find An Apartment anywhere in the DFW Go To www.Apartmentsrentrebate.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.