A concrete concern

photos by Ian Christmann

Made infamous by the movie Erin Brokovich, the compound hexavalent chromium is a classified carcinogen, of controversial concern in drinking water as the film’s storyline reveals.  But what, if any, impact does it have on the ecosystems of non-drinking source waterways, such as the Quinnipiac River?

Prior to the 1990s, hexavalent chromium was widely used in industry. Today, it is mainly used in electro-plating, leather-tanning, wood preservation and the manufacture of plastic and dyes. Hexavalent chromium is most dangerous when chronically inhaled through dust, fumes or mist, a risk in “hot work” such as welding stainless steel or the use of certain spray paints and coatings. When it comes to hexavalent chromium’s impact in water, many questions still remain. Soluble compounds are a weaker carcinogen, however, according to a 2011 study of hexavalent chromium in drinking water, published by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, “there is now sufficient evidence that hexavalent chromium is also carcinogenic by the oral route of exposure, based on studies in rats and mice conducted by the National Toxicology Program.”

Empowered by a grant from the Quinnipiac River Fund (a component fund of The Community Foundation for Greater New Haven), Yale University is helping shed further light on hexavalent chromium by measuring its concentration in storm water run-off in the Quinnipiac River watershed.

During heavy rains, water drains off large impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and roads, throughout Central Connecticut. Much of it eventually exits into the Quinnipiac River. In the past, combined sewer overflows brought all sewer water (both rain and sewage) to be treated in sewage plants. Unfortunately, with heavy rain conditions, the systems often overflowed, allowing raw sewage into rivers. New laws required sewer separation, bringing only raw sewage to treatment plants and draining rainwater directly to rivers and water bodies. Sewer separation solved the problem of sewage overflows, but created a new unique problem: heavy metal pollutants, such as hexavalent chromium, in surface run-off are being deposited, untreated, into the river.

Not only do large paved areas transport pollutants, but when it comes to hexavalent chromium, the concrete itself is a suspected source of the compound, making the highly developed Quinnipiac River watershed a perfect testing ground. Results of the testing are confirming concrete as a source, with higher concentrations of hexavalent chromium being found in watershed’s tributaries that are downstream of areas with more urban land cover, a relationship that is especially clear while it’s raining.

The Quinnipiac River Fund awarded Yale University a grant in March of 2013 to support the measurement of hexavalent chromium concentrations and chemical behavior in storm water within the watershed and in the River itself. The Fund has supported numerous research studies of chemical pollution in the River and its effects on species of flora and fauna that call the Quinnipiac home.

Three New Haven Companies to Pay Fines for Violation of Polution Control Laws

The Associated Press recently reported that a court has ordered three New Haven companies and their operator to pay nearly $750,000 in penalties for violations of the state’s hazardous waste and air pollution control laws.

Bruno Suraci Jr. operates the metal finishing businesses at two locations in New Haven, including one along the Quinnipiac River.

The state of Connecticut had alleged violations including improper storage, lack of proper permits and failure to conduct inspections. State officials say employees, the public and the environment were exposed to serious risks.

Click here for more information.

A preserve within a preserve

Volunteers clear invasive plants from Quinnipiac Meadows

A preserve within a preserve

From 1-91, the strip of land looks like a golden wild island in the River. Although it is actually connected to land, the 35-acre Quinnipiac Meadows/ Eugene B. Fargegorge Preserve serves as an island of sorts: a serene oasis of plant life and wildlife amid the surrounding bustle of houses and highways, billboards, condos and shopping centers.

With ospreys and owls, herons, fox and terapin, wildlife abounds in the preserve, but the land’s true potential is being compromised by threat that many never notice: invasive plant species. Aggressive, weedy trees and shrubs have created a dense thicket in areas of the preserve. In the upland portion in particular, three invasive shrubs — bush honeysuckle, buckthorn, and autumn olive — dominate the land,  smothering the native trees, such as eastern red cedar, winged sumac, and eastern cottonwood, that make the area unique.

The New Haven Land Trust is working to create a preserve within the preserve, clearing and suppressing the invasives so the coastal riparian plant community can thrive. On October 13 and Oct. 20, dedicated groups of volunteers rose to the labor-intensive occasion. Donning long pants, close-toed shoes and work gloves, they wielded chainsaws and machetes to clear an overgrown 1.2 acre area near the bird blind overlooking the salt marsh and river.

“In an urban environment, preserving the few natural places that we do have is critical,” said JR Logan, volunteer and board president for the New Haven Land Trust. “These volunteers have chosen to put their efforts into creating an environment where we can have a greater biodiversity, a space where those in New Haven can have an experience with nature.”

The Land Trust plans to mow an additional five acres overrun with invasive grasses and, when the weather warms, add new plantings of native species to help the preserve thrive as a wildlife habitat.

In line with its mission to promote the appreciation and preservation of natural resources in New Haven, the New Haven Land Trust has been working in the Quinnipiac Meadows preserve for more than a decade. In 2009, The Quinnipiac River Fund supported a Land Trust program to promote public education and access in the Preserve. Volunteers fuel the current invasive-clearing work, with support by the National Resources Conservation Service for the project’s management.

Well Fracking

To people who care about rivers and water quality,

In order to frack a well – besides the many toxic chemicals and sand
that is included with the huge amount of water – each “frack” takes
anywhere from 3 to 5 million gallons of water – that is then mixed
with the chemicals and the sand.

It sometimes takes many “fracks” to frack a well — and each frack
takes that much water.

People who care about rivers and their ability to flow with water in
them – or people who care about aquifers – should all care about this
issue.

As well, when the fluid returns to the surface – it then contains not
only the chemicals that went down with the water – it also now
contains materials from the deep – such as arsenic, uranium, salts
and other compounds from one mile underneath the surface of the earth.
People who care about water quality should also care about this.
This is just some of the issues with fracking and does not even
discuss the other things – such as what do you do with the millions
of gallons of toxic waste water.

Best, Nancy


Nancy Alderman, President
Environment and Human Health, Inc.
1191 Ridge Road
North Haven, CT 06473
(phone) 203-248-6582
(Fax) 203-288-7571
http://www.ehhi.org
http://ehhijournal.org

Cleaning the Quinnipiac, one pollutant at a time

One thing that everyone agrees on: the Quinnipiac River is a lot healthier than it used to be.

“It really was a cesspool,” said Mary Mushinsky, a state legislator from Wallingford and science educator for the Quinnipiac River Watershed Association. Mushinsky remembers a river full of old tires, shopping carts and untreated sewage. “In the old days parents would warn their children to stay away from the river,” she said. “It’s come back in a big way.”

Not far enough, though.

State environmentalists have now taken aim at phosphorous. The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) released new limits on phosphorous in 2011, triggering an uproar in some towns along the river that will have to spend millions to meet the new mandates.

Phosphorous, unlike the PCBs, heavy metals and sewage that have historically contaminated the Quinnipiac, is not a public health threat, although it occasionally spurs the growth of toxin-producing blue-green algae.

So why is the state pouring so much time and energy into cleaning it up?

“It’s been an evolution,” said Betsey Wingfield, DEEP’s bureau chief, Water Protection and Land Reuse. “First we got the solids out. Then we worked on dissolved oxygen and bacteria and heavy metals. Then it was nitrogen, and now it’s phosphorous.”

DEEP environmental analyst Mary Becker insists that the new focus on phosphorous doesn’t mean that the state is neglecting Quinnipiac’s other pollution problems. While industrial chemicals remain an issue, tougher regulations, closing factories and remediation have reduced their levels.

Copper levels, for instance, which serve as a marker of industrial processes, have decreased from an average of 9.6 parts per billion (PPB) in 1982 to an average 3.18 PPB in 2011, according to the United States Geological Survey. Companies, such as Solvents Recovery Services of New England in Southington, which sat 500 feet from the Quinnipiac and discharged lead, mercury, PCBs and other toxic chemicals into the river, have shut down.

Toxins remain in the soil and sediment – some PCBs, especially, do not decompose easily and can linger for decades – but state and federal programs are slowly cleaning them up.

“There are still remaining remediation sites along the Quinnipiac, but we have established programs to handle the toxics,” said Becker, who says that these cleanup programs will continue as before, despite the new focus on phosphorous. “If we want a healthy river, we have to focus on nutrients as well.”

One of the key differences between historical pollutants on the Quinnipiac and phosphorous is their source. Historically toxins leaked into the river from hundreds specific “point” sources and more diffuse “non-point” sources alike. Phosphorous is different. According to DEEP, 93.5 percent of the river’s phosphorus comes from just four sources: water treatment plants in Southington, Cheshire, Meriden and Wallingford.

While other sources, such as fertilizer runoff, likely contribute to the Quinnipiac’s phosphorous burden as well, it’s clear that the water treatment plants pack the biggest punch, so the new rules hit them hard. Each of the four facilities must reduce their daily phosphorous discharge to .2 PPM per day, except for Meriden, which must get down to .1 PPM per day.

“We want to be good stewards of the Quinnipiac,” said Southington Town Manager Garry Brumback. “But to go from 2.8 parts per million of phosphorous to .2 parts per million is a $18 million proposition, and we don’t even know if it will fix the problem.”

DEEP scientists argue that their science is sound. Plants need phosphorous to grow, but excess causes an overgrowth of plants and algae. By late summer, algae blooms cover the surface of the Quinnipiac like a blanket, making it impossible to canoe or kayak through certain parts of the river. In the fall, when the algae die and sink to the bottom, they consume dissolved oxygen in the water, making it unhealthy for fish, frogs and other river species.

According to DEEP calculations, when a freshwater river reaches an “enrichment factor” of 8.4 – that’s 8.4 times the natural level of phosphorous – algae blooms are triggered. The Quinnipiac is one of the worst affected rivers in the state, with an enrichment factor of 31 to 68, depending on sampling time and location. Getting the Quinnipiac to 8.4 will require a four-to-eightfold reduction in phosphorous.

Meeting the new limits will be expensive. Reducing phosphorous to .3 or .4 PPM can usually be done with lower-cost chemical or biological methods. But getting it lower than that requires large, expensive filters usually housed in a separate building. For the town of Southington, for instance, lowering phosphorous output to .7 PPM would cost about $50,000, according to town manager Brumback, but getting down to the required .2 PPM would cost an estimated $18 million, leading to a 20 to 23 percent rate increase for consumers.

“Below .2 is where it gets into major money,” said Frank Russo, superintendent at the Meriden Water Pollution Control Facility. Russo noted that adding phosphorous filters will cost his town $13 million, leading to a 22 percent rate increase for customers. This would be an especially painful financial burden for Meriden, which just completed a full plant upgrade in 2010, leading to a 27 percent rate increase for customers.

“It’s not like the phosphorous in the water is a health hazard or anything,” said Russo, who noted that their new system has already dropped phosphorous levels in the plant’s effluent by 70 percent. “Right by the outfall pipe we have 24-inch trout swimming around, the water’s so clear.”

Russo noted that in May, the state passed a law limiting the amount of phosphorous fertilizer that homeowners can use on their lawns. He and others argue that these new regulations, along with some water treatment control of phosphorous, might fix the river.

Scientists and advocates say this reasoning is faulty, however.

“Partway isn’t good enough,” Mushinsky said. “If the goal is to stop the algae blooms, then we need to respect the science. And what the science says is that the blooms are triggered by an enrichment factor of 8.4. There’s no reason to think that the science is not accurate.”

The new rules will be imposed when facilities renew their water permits, though the state will offer them extra time to comply with the new phosphorous rules. Currently the permits for all four plants are awaiting renewal. The affected municipalities have formed a coalition to oppose the new phosphorus limits.

DEEP’s Wingfield is sympathetic to the towns’ plight, but noted that the Connecticut limits are generally less strict than those imposed by the EPA in states like Massachusetts and New Hampshire. She also pointed out that the sewage treatment plants could get financial assistance through the Connecticut Clean Water Fund. In fact, the town of Cheshire dropped out of the coalition after receiving Clean Water Fund support for their upcoming $32 million treatment plant upgrade, $7 million of which will be for phosphorous reduction.

Even with the new limits, the Quinnipiac has a long way to go before it’s truly clean.

“It’s not like you get the phosphorous turned off and it’ll be perfect. It’s a long-term project,” said Becker, who calls the Quinnipiac watershed a “challenging” one.

“Someday it would be nice to think about kids going down to the Quinnipiac for fishing and boating, and not being grossed out by algae coming after them like the blob from the deep,” she said.

Indeed, in the 1890s, tourists traveled from across the region to swim at Dossin Beach and enjoy the park at Hanover Pond.

“I’m probably being idealistic,” said Becker, “but I’d like to think that people might be able to use the river in that way again.”

This story was reported under a partnership with the Connecticut Health I-Team (www.c-hit.org).


URL: http://www.middletownpress.com/articles/2012/07/16/news/doc50040f7446788…