top of page

NEWS

Search

Combating Lead Contaminated Water Through Policy Action

Every time a faucet is turned on in your home, water rushes through a network of unseen pipes, driven by pressure so you can use it to wash your hands, do the dishes, or fill a glass. When you dry your hands off or raise the cool glass of water to your lips, you are probably not thinking of water pollution. That, you think, is vats of dark oil spilling into the ocean. It is piles of trash floating atop the surface of swamps and strangling wildlife. It is cyanobacteria producing toxic algal blooms. And yet water pollution is much closer than one might think.


Water can be polluted as it traverses through the pipes in people’s homes. Homes with lead service lines, pipes that connect the home to the main water line, can cause lead to be present in drinking water. Homes without lead service lines can still have brass or chrome-plated brass faucets, galvanized iron pipes, or plumbing with lead solder. Lead enters drinking water when the plumbing corrodes, because of a reaction between water and the plumbing that occurs when the water has high acidity or low mineral content. [1]


To combat contamination in drinking water, Congress passed the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), which allowed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set standards for drinking water quality. [2] For lead, the EPA has set the maximum contaminant level goal at zero because lead can bioaccumulate in the body and is harmful to human health even at low exposure levels. In addition, the EPA issued the Lead and Copper Rule under the authority of the SDWA, which requires utilities to make water less corrosive to plumbing. [3]


For young children, infants, and fetuses, lead is particularly harmful. In children, low levels of lead in the blood have been linked to damage to the nervous system, behavior and learning problems, slowed growth, and impaired hearing. Ingestion of lead can also cause seizures, coma, and death. While drinking water isn’t the only source of lead exposure for children, the EPA estimates that water can make up about twenty percent of a person’s total exposure to lead. [3] In adults, exposure to lead can lead to cardiovascular and kidney problems.


Although not many houses built after 1986 contain lead service lines, there are steps to take if you think your water might have lead. Water can be tested through water utilities, and a “point-of-use” filter can be used. Cold water doesn’t corrode pipes as much as hot water, and the pipes can be flushed before drinking by taking a shower or doing the dishes. [3]


Ultimately, although the threat of lead contaminating drinking water has subsided in recent years, it’s a reminder that the world is more connected than we think. Even small choices can have an impact far greater than we might imagine.







The Moral Dilemma of Overlighting Our Cities

With the rise of new technologies, we have been gradually lighting up our world. However, these indulgences place not only a burden on our environment, but also a hidden burden on ourselves. Within the past decade, megacities such as Las Vegas and Hong Kong have benefited significantly from their appealing nighttime scene. They feature daily light shows and streets lit up with LED signs and advertisements. These are major tourist attractions that improve the city’s economy, but do we really want to sacrifice the lives of native animals just so that we can take pretty photos to post on social media?


To understand the situation and conflicting values more clearly, we must weigh the pros and cons of using LED lights. They are often referred to as an “extraordinary breakthrough,” allowing us to conserve energy and save the environment. They are sturdier, have a longer lifespan, and make for a better long term investment. Cities benefit greatly from the use of LED lighting, as it has been shown that “public lighting can reduce crime by up to 20% and traffic accidents by up to 35%.” LED lights are commonly used in Christmas decorations and as shop decorations, bringing more business and tourism to shops, malls, and the city in general. People love traveling to these intensely urban areas covered with LED signs. A popular example is New York Times Square, which is famous for its digital screens and billboards, the largest of which features a 125,000-square-foot screen.


However, this popularity has led to an overuse. This isn’t the first time a miracle like LEDs has turned into a curse. Some areas are even overlit due to how luminous LED lights are compared to incandescent and fluorescent lights. Public lighting is definitely important for pedestrian safety, however light shows and streets covered with LED signs are completely unnecessary and not worth their detrimental impact to the environment.


LED signs and lighting are viewed as a “need” by large business corporations so that they can profit and attract customers, but it is completely unethical for these billionaires to overlook any negative side effects and barrel straight towards the money. An increased number of tourists leads to a higher influx of people moving into the city. This propels the rate of urban sprawl and in turn increases pollution and invades more animal habitats. Frogs, moths, and sea turtles are all attracted to city lighting. This means that native wild animals outside of the city won’t have a reliable food source, therefore hurting other animals in the food chain. Newborn sea turtles scramble towards the brightest horizon, which is now artificial lighting by cities, causing them to be crushed to death by cars. They are already classified as endangered, and bright city lighting is only bringing them closer to extinction. Greenwashing also plays a large role in the popularity of LED lighting. Because they are seen as more environmentally friendly, people feel better about themselves when they use LED lights and don’t pay attention to its downsides.


Instead of continuing to overinflate our cities with people and ruin the surrounding ecosystem, we should reduce and get rid of excessive lighting, while limiting the construction of LED signs and billboards. An effective way to prevent new lighting decorations from being built is to stop visiting these areas, convincing companies that fancy lights would not be profitable for their business. Furthermore, wavelengths of light closer to the UV spectrum such as blue and violet LEDs disrupt the circadian rhythm of animals more than longer wavelengths of light. Longer wavelengths of light like red and amber colors are less visible to wildlife, and they will be less attracted to these lights. Shorter wavelengths of light contribute more to light pollution, as they travel further and make up the majority of skyglow. While some lights and billboards can’t be removed, we can still put them into “night mode.” Similar to how our phones turn more orange tinted and less blue at night, we could do the same with outdoor lighting. This would be relatively simple with billboard displays, as the RGB of the image displayed could just be adjusted. Currently at the New York Times Square, the billboards are on throughout the day and night. Even turning these lights off for a few hours late at night would make a big difference.


City lights act as vacuums for moths and insects, bleach birds’ retinas so that they circle endlessly until they drop dead, attract and dehydrate frogs, and lure baby sea turtles to be crushed by vehicles. While basic public lighting is important, the overuse of these lights in order to attract tourism and business is unethical. The health of our environment should never be compromised for the sake of monetary benefit. We have already drained many of our earth’s natural resources dry, so reducing unnecessary LED light usage is the least we can do to save the environment.


Citations


Makumbe, Jie Lipedzi. “Led Street Lighting: Unburdening Our Cities.” World Bank Blogs, 7 Aug. 2017, blogs.worldbank.org/energy/led-street-lighting-unburdening-our-cities.


Weaver, Shaye. “North America’s Largest Billboard Is Now Displaying Hyperrealistic Crashing Waves.” Time out New York, 19 July 2021,

www.timeout.com/newyork/news/north-americas-largest-billboard-is-now-displaying-hyperrealistic-crashing-waves-071921. Accessed 20 July 2023.


“About Lighting Pollution.” Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, myfwc.com/conservation/you-conserve/lighting/pollution/#:~:text=Artificial%20light%20has%20several%20general.


“Sea Turtle | Species | WWF.” World Wildlife Fund, www.worldwildlife.org/species/sea-turtle#:~:text=Climate%20change%20has%20an%20impact.


“French Authorities Warn of Health Dangers from LED Lighting.” CTVNews, 15 May 2019, www.ctvnews.ca/health/french-authorities-warn-of-health-dangers-from-led-lighting-1.4423910?cache=%3FclipId%3D373266. Accessed 20 July 2023.


December 22, on, and 2016. “Why Is Blue Light at Night Bad?” International Dark-Sky Association, 22 Dec. 2016, www.darksky.org/why-is-blue-light-at-night-bad/


The California Water Board’s Legislative Response to Microplastic Contamination

Updated: Apr 17, 2023

Microplastics are commonly defined as any plastic fragment less than 5 mm in length. They originate from numerous sources: they’re created from the degradation of larger plastics into smaller pieces, from the dispersal of synthetic fibers from certain types of fabrics, and from the manufacturing of microbeads in beauty products. [1] In recent years, microplastics have become an increasingly pervasive problem. They have been found in over 90% of tap and bottled water samples, [2] and humans are estimated to consume up to 50,000 microplastics every year. [3]


Despite such a widespread presence of microplastics in the environment, the health impacts of these particles have yet to be determined, although current research indicates that they are likely to be deleterious. Microplastics have been found to absorb hazardous substances like heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), and more. They also may accumulate in narrow passages in the human body, resulting in blockages, inflammation, and other adverse health effects.


With the risks that microplastics pose to the environment and to human health, California lawmakers have taken several preliminary steps toward solving the problem. After banning the production of microbeads, California passed Senate Bill 1422 in 2018, requiring the State Water Resources Control Board to adopt a definition of microplastics by July 2020 and develop a standard methodology for the detection of microplastics in drinking water by July 2021. [3]


In November 2021, the State Water Board published The Microplastics in Drinking Water Policy Handbook, which details the progress that has been made after the passing of Senate Bill 1422. The document defines “nanoplastics” as any particle between 1 nm and 100 µm and “large microplastics” as any particle between 100 µm and 2.5 cm. The Board establishes two primary methods for the detection of microplastics: Raman spectroscopy and infrared spectroscopy. Both these techniques use similar approaches to identify plastics. In Raman spectroscopy, high-intensity light is used to excite the molecules within individual particles. The Raman scattered light that is returned can be used to analyze the particle’s chemical composition. In infrared spectroscopy, a machine measures the vibration of molecules through infrared light.


While both these methods are effective at accurately identifying microplastics, spectroscopy still has some distinct disadvantages. The procedure uses highly complex and expensive devices that require trained personnel to operate, making it inapplicable to many scenarios where microplastic detection is needed. Additionally, it is often infeasible to count nanoplastics individually through this approach. As a result, the California Water Board is considering “surrogate methods” such as flow cytometry, turbidity, and total suspended solids to more cheaply and efficiently detect microplastics while maintaining a high degree of accuracy.


Notably, Senate Bill 1422 does not discuss the filtration of microplastics from drinking water. Such topics need to be addressed in future pieces of legislation. Furthermore, efforts to prevent the continued production and spread of microplastics into the environment also need to be prioritized. Though California has taken important some initial steps, more change must happen if the state wants to target the spread of microplastics before it becomes a more prominent issue.



bottom of page