The Lancet study found that as many as 77 million people, or half the population of Bangladesh, may have been exposed to toxic levels of arsenic. They followed 12,000 Bangladeshis over the course of 10 years and found more than 20% of deaths were caused by arsenic.

Chronic arsenic exposure can lead to heart disease and cancers of the liver, kidney, bladders and skin—even at relatively low levels of exposure:

Compared to those exposed to the lowest arsenic levels (less than 10 microgrammes of arsenic per litre of water), those with levels of 10-50ppb had a 34% higher risk of death.

The World Health Organization calls this “the largest mass poisoning of a population in history”. But what’s going on in Bangladesh is not unique. More than 70 countries around the world have issues with arsenic in their groundwater including the U.S.

The Minnesota Department of Health has found that 15% of private wells in Minnesota exceed 10ppb of Arsenic as shown on this map:

Minnesota Arsenic levels

Premier Water has a successful track record of removing both Arsenic III and IV with reverse osmosis drinking water systems, and Pureoflow whole-house/business purification systems. Call us at (952) 479-4553 to find out more.

Studies conducted by personnel at Hach Homeland Security Technologies, Colorado State University and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers among others have shown that attacks on drinking water supplies could be mounted for between $0.05 and $5.00 per death, using rudimentary techniques, and could amass casualties in the thousands over a period of hours.

The simplest form of attack that could inflict mass casualties would be a simple backflow contamination event. A backflow attack occurs when a pump is used to overcome the water pressure in the distribution system’s pipes. This is usually around 80psi and can be easily achieved by using pumps available for rent or purchase at most home improvement stores.

After a contaminant has been pumped in, a siphoning effects acts to pull the contaminant into the flowing system. Once the contaminant is present in the pipes, the normal movement of water in the system will spread the contaminant throughout the city water system.

The introduction point can be anywhere in the system such as a fire hydrant, commercial building or a home. See figure 1.

Fig. 1 All systems are vulnerable to backflow attack.

Backflows accidents happen on a regular basis and are of great concern to the water industry. Accidental backflow events have been found to be responsible for many incidents of water borne illness and even death in the United States. According to the USEPA, backflow events caused 57 disease outbreaks and 9734 cases of water borne disease between 1981 and 1998.

To prevent such accidental backflows many systems have been equipped with backflow prevention devices. These means of preventing backflow are very useful in preventing these common accidental events. Unfortunately, these physical devices that can be removed or disabled quite easily by a terrorist, rendering them ineffective in preventing deliberate attempts at contamination by all but the most amateurish perpetrators.

Studies conducted by the U.S. Air Force and Colorado State University have shown that a few gallons of highly toxic material, if injected at a strategic location, would contaminate an entire system supplying a population of 100,000 people in a matter of a few hours.

Using computer simulations, when a military nerve agent material was used over 20% of the population was determined to have received a dose adequate to result in death and when a common chemical was used in place of the warfare agent the result was a casualty rate of over 10%.

Thousands of deaths could result from this very inexpensive and low-tech mode of attack. There is no doubt that this form of assault meets all of the terrorist’s criteria for an attack. It would cause mass casualties, be inexpensive, and actually offer the terrorists a good chance of avoiding apprehension.

These sorts of attacks can occur from any access point to the water system. Wherever water can be drawn out, material can be forced back into the system. Some areas, however, are more vulnerable than others. Access points near high flow areas and larger pipes would be favored because they would disseminate the material to a wider area more quickly.

It should be obvious from the large number of accidental backflows that occur and the fact that terrorist organizations have shown an interest in attacking water, the distribution system is a prime candidate for such an attack.

The fact is a bona fide terrorist is virtually inundated by possible candidate substances and locations that would be very effective in such a role. The possibilities are virtually endless. Protecting against and/or detecting such an attack is difficult.

Recent breakthroughs in the online detection of contaminants have made the deployment of a cost effective early warning system capable of detecting and categorizing such events a reality. The simple truth is that these systems are not widely deployed.

This is a re-hash of an article written by Dan Kroll and Katy Craig of Hach Homeland Security Technologies.

1. Kroll,Dan. 2006. Securing Our Water Supply: Protecting a Vulnerable Resource.
PennWell Publishers. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
2. Hickman, Donald C. 1999. A chemical and biological warfare threat: USAF water systems at risk. Counter Proliferation paper No. 3. USAF Counter Proliferation Center, Air War College.
3. Kroll, Dan. 2003. Mass Casualties on a Budget. Confidential Briefing Paper. Hach HST.
4. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. n.d. Calculations on threat agents and requirements and logistics for mounting a successful backflow attack.
5. Allman, T.P. 2003. Drinking water distribution system modeling for predicting the impact and detection of intentional contamination. Master’s Thesis. Department of Civil Engineering. Colorado State University.
6. USEPA 2002. Potential Contamination Due to Cross-Connections and backflow and the Associated health risks: An Issue Paper.
7. Allman, Timothy and Kenneth Carlson. 2005. Modeling Intentional Distribution System Contamination and Detection. Journal of the American Water Works Association.
January. Note: that the executive summary of this article is still available but the full text has been pulled from the AWWA website for security reasons as it was
determined that the details could be helpful to would be terrorists.
8. EPA. Water Security and You. http://cfpub.epa.gov/safewater/watersecurity/pubs/water-security-article.pdf

I had a different reaction.

“I wonder if snow would make better drinking water than Plymouth’s tap water?”

We often measure water quality for our clients with a TDS meter. TDS, or Total Dissolved Solids, is a measure of all the “non-water” materials that have been dissolved into the water.

Pure water measures out at ZERO (0ppm or 0 parts per million). It’s made of Hydrogen and Oxygen.

Plymouth, MN tap water measures out around 310ppm and contains low levels of arsenic, chlorine, copper, lead, trihalomethanes, etc.

So I set out to compare the quality of snow to tap water.

The experiment was simple:

Step One: Obtain the a nice clear cup and a TDS (Total Dissolved Solids) meter.

TDS Meter

Step Two: Fill cup with fresh snow from my driveway (also reduces future shoveling)

TDS Meter and Snow Sample

Step Three: Wait until snow has melted and water warms to room temperature.

TDS Meter and Snow

Results: As you can see, the melted snow tested out at 0ppm dissolved solids. This would make much higher quality drinking water than Plymouth’s tap water, and even many brands of bottled water. This is very similar to the water quality produced by our whole house Pureoflow system and our under sink Reverse Osmosis systems.

As you can see our in-house taste expert, Thor, was immediately drawn to the crisp, fresh taste this snow provided.

Cat drinking water

The EPA and other stakeholders looked at 7,500 substances before coming up with the final list of 116 contaminants. After the EPA drew up a preliminary list, it added 10 pharmaceuticals, 1 antibiotic and 9 hormones, 2 disinfection byproducts, 5 microbes and firefighting foam.  The full CCL 3 list of contaminants can be found at this EPA Web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/ccl

Many of these substances that appeared on CCL 1 in 1998 have been “rolled over” into CCL 2 and now CCL 3 — an indication that they’re still considered potentially harmful. Examples of some that appear on the new CCL 3 and were also on prior lists are adenoviruses (viruses that can cause respiratory and gastrointestinal illnesses), acetochlor (a weed-control herbicide), vanadium (a natural element), and cyanotoxins (produced by blue-green algae).

The Water Quality Association (WQA) recently proposed that removal/reduction of the following 17 substances, some of which are endocrine-disrupting chemicals, pharmaceuticals, or personal care products, could be priorities for developing new NSF/ANSI performance standards for drinking water treatment units. None of these are now regulated:

Atenolol: Beta blocker (heart) medication

Bisphenol A (BPA): Ingredient in plastic/EDC

Carbamazepine: Anti-seizure medication

DEET: Insecticide

Diazinon: Insecticide/EDC

Estrone: Steroid (estrogen hormone)

Ibuprofin: Pain medication

Linuron: Herbicide/EDC

Meprobamate: Anti-anxiety medication

Metolachlor: Pesticide

Naproxen: Pain medication

Nonyl phenol: Surfactant (cleaning compound)/EDC

Phenytoin: Anti-convulsant medication

Risperidone: Schizophrenia treatment

TCEP: Flame retardant

TCPP: Flame retardant

Trimethoprim: Antibiotic

Future Role of the Water Treatment Industry
The water treatment industry “can offer the most advanced technologies available for dealing with endocrine-disrupting, pharmaceutical and personal care product residues in drinking water,” says Joe Harrison, technical director of the Water Quality Association (WQA). “We welcome the EPA benchmarks to guide our product development and performances in this new emerging area.”

Harrison says there’s no single POU/POE technology that can address all emerging contaminants. He says, “It appears that reverse osmosis (RO), activated carbon blocks, and advanced oxidation, such as is achieved by combining in various degrees hydrogen peroxide, ultraviolet light and/or ozone … may show effectiveness in treating many of these.”

Premier Water Technology has been dealing with problem water applications since 1978.  As water quality continues to change, we are prepared to face the new challenges that lie ahead.  We have a proven track record with known contaminants like Arsenic and Coliform Bacteria.  It’s strange to think we will someday offer water treatment solutions for anxiety medications, hormones, and flame retardants.

One resident described the city’s tap was as “Chlorinated, dirty, smelly, scummy pond water”.

Independent testing confirmed chlorine levels at .7ppm (parts per million) which is about the same as a swimming pool.  Most communities in the Twin Cities have chlorine levels that range from .3ppm – .5ppm.

The water problems seem to come from a new city water treatment plant that re-uses waste water from a Burnsville mining company.  Officials say the cause of the foul odor is from build-up of algae and organic compounds.

Officials say as bad as the water might smell, it doesn’t pose any health risks.  The city is working on the problem, but unfortunately, it can’t happen overnight.

“It’s perfectly safe to drink. There’s no concerns with that. You might not like the smell or the taste at this time, but it is getting better,” said Burnsville City Council Member Dan Gustafson.

Burnsville, like many suburbs in the Twin Cities, does a good job at keeping their tap water “safe”, but not necessarily “delicious”.  More and more homeowners and businesses are dissatisfied with tap water because of this.

The water filtration and purification systems we carry are both environmentally-friendly and cost-effective solutions to these tap water dilemmas.  Our clients get water that is safe AND great tasting: You should too!!!

Atrazine is listed as a primary drinking water contaminant by the EPA. The agency now sets the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of atrazine in drinking water at 3 parts per billion (ppb) (3 micrograms per liter), but it adds that levels in excess of that pose health risks over a long period. On its Web site, the agency says, “An occasional peak concentration above 3 ppb is, therefore, not cause for concern. Rather, a long-term, consistent value above a yearly average of 3 ppb would be of concern.”

A recent investigation by The New York Times found that levels of atrazine, often applied before and after planting to control broadleaf and grassy weeds, have spiked well above the allowable maximum in many public water systems, sometimes for as much as a month at a time, but few water systems have reported those occurrences.

So it looks like Atrazine could follow in Arsenic’s footsteps, which ended up having it’s “Allowable Limit” lowered from 50ppb to 10ppb.  It makes you wonder what will be allowed 10, or 20 years from now.  What was once considered safe could be considered dangerous.

Yet another reason to bathe and drink the purest water you can.