By JAMES LAUGHLIN
WaterWorld Editor
ANAHEIM, Calif., Oct. 17, 2000—Education and the "laymanization" of the wastewater treatment process is the only real way to reduce the "yuck factor" associated with indirect potable reuse of wastewater and biosolids programs, according to speakers at a seminar for journalists attending the Water Environment Federation's WEFTEC conference and exhibition.
The conference, which runs Oct. 14-18 in Anaheim, Calif., covers water quality issues for municipal and industrial topics. More than 15,000 industry professionals and over 800 exhibitors were expected to attend the 73rd annual event, attending discussions on such topics as utility management, groundwater remediation, watershed management, water reuse, biological monitoring, biosolids/residuals management and more.
Conference management expects more than 15,000 to attend the conference. Daily updates are available at WEF's web site, www.wef.org.
The seminar entitled, "Water Quality Issues for the 21st Century" focused on challenges faced by utilities in Southern California. Speakers included Earle Hartling, Water Recycling Coordinator for the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, and Raymond Kearney, Principal Sanitary Engineer & Regulatory Affairs Division Manger for the City of Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation.
"We have the technology to go from pipe to pipe to glass," said WEF President Al Goodman. "The question is, do we really need to do it now, and is it the right time."
Indirect potable reuse of reclaimed water has been occurring in Southern California for about 40 years, as treated effluent is allowed to percolate into the ground, replenishing drinking water aquifers. However, recent similar projects in San Diego, the San Gabriel Valley, the City of Los Angeles, and Dublin-San Ramon have faced high profile opposition that has effectively used the alliterative phrase "toilet to tap" to inflame public emotions while pushing aside sound science. The result has been the delay or outright cancellation of water recycling projects in Southern California.
The industry has had mixed success dealing with print and electronic media in responding to the "yuck factor" fostered by simplistic explanation of water recycling. Unfortunately, reporting all sides of a story can mean that even misleading claims without scientific merit will be included in an article or broadcast.
An example cited by speakers is a recent USA Today article, "CDC Sounds a Warning on Risks of Sludge," and the impact this articles and others have had on the management of biosolids in California.
Hartling started off his presentation by passing around a jar of water drawn from the effluent pipe at a local wastewater treatment plant.
"This water meets all drinking water standards and far exceeds the quality of the water coming from the environment," Hartling said. "The media uses the term toilet to tap but completely ignores all the millions of dollars and technology that come between the two."
In many cases, programs such as those in San Diego and San Gabriel were "blocked by someone that had a reason to oppose the project that was not health based," Hartling said. In the case of San Gabriel, the program was blocked by a beer company owned by a cigarette company.
"They said they were worried about the public's health," Hartling said. He noted that the company's opposition to the project went away when the groundwater recharge system was moved to another location.
In the case of San Diego, politicians running for re-election suddenly "discovered" the issue of indirect potable reuse, even though the project had been in the works for a number of years and some of those politicians had actually voted for the program in its early stages.
Kearney discussed the challenges faced by Los Angeles in disposing of its biosolids. The city currently treats its solids to Class B standards and land applies the finished product on city-owned land in Kern County. The county requires that LA conduct extensive monitoring of the program and has imposed a $3.37/ton road impact fee for trucks hauling biosolids.
"Apparently the trucks hauling biosolids cause more damage to the county's roads than carrot trucks of the same size," Kearney said.
The county also has passed an ordinance that would ban application of non-Class A biosolids by January 2003.
Los Angeles has studied producing Class A biosolids and other alternatives such as incineration and shipping biosolids out of state. All the alternatives are prohibitively expensive compared to land application of Class B material, Kearney said.
Hartling said an extensive public education process is needed for any viable program. He said the model of "design, announce and defend" is not viable. The public and the media should be brought into the process at the concept stage. He suggested that utility members visit with the editorial boards of the local media, send out mailings to area residents, and visit with civic groups. He said most public hearings are ineffective, since only those opposed to the program will attend, but plant tours are particularly helpful.
Tours can "open up the black box" that is a wastewater treatment plant and help the public really understand the science and technology behind water treatment, Hartling said.
"Familiarly is really the only way to reduce the Yuck Factor," he said.
