Epa to Re-Examine Impact of Sewage Sludge Fertilizer

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says it’s ready to take a new look at the science and risks involved in using treated human waste – sewage sludge – as fertilizer on farmland. That’s seen as good news for people who live near farms using sewage sludge. Some of them say the sludge makes them sick. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Amy Tardif reports:

Transcript

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says it’s ready to take a new look at the science and
risks involved in using treated human waste – sewage sludge – as fertilizer on farmland. That’s
seen as good news for people who live near farms using sewage sludge. Some of them say the
sludge makes them sick. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Amy Tardif reports:


About three million dry tons of treated sewage – called sludge – is used to fertilize sod, pasture
land and even food crops every year in the United States. As cities sprawl and people move into
rural areas they discover the practice. And many don’t like it.


“We were like what is that smell? This is sick. It makes you want to vomit. Your eyes start
burning and you want to get away from it as quick as you can.”


Molly Bowen is one of a group of homeowners suing the haulers who dump and landowners who
use sewage sludge near their neighborhood. People around the country have blamed the sludge
for causing illnesses and even deaths. They say their wells are contaminated with sludge. They
say they breathe sludge dust blowing from recently treated fields. Bowen and her neighbors
blame the sludge for a lot of health problems.


“Laryngitis, stomach, upper respiratory, not being able to breath well.”


For a while these people thought no one was listening. But cases are coming in from all over and
the Environmental Protection Agency is starting to pay attention. In 2002, the EPA asked the
National Academy of Sciences to study the public health aspects of sludge. Thomas Burke is a
professor and epidemiologist with Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health.
He chaired the study.


“This is poop we’re talking about here. It has the potential to cause serious illness if they’re not treated
appropriately and if there is not appropriate protection of the population.”


Burke and others studied to see if the EPA methods used to determine the limits for chemicals,
viruses and bacteria in sewage sludge were strong enough. Burke says the methods are not strong
enough to use the sludge safely.


“We need to understand better the potential health effects. We need a new national survey to
understand the microbes and the potential pathogens that might be present. And also we need to
better characterize the chemicals that might be present in sludge. The current rules are based upon
work that was done back in the ’80’s.”


The EPA is looking at those concerns. It says it will try to determine if there are contaminants in
the sludge that could cause health problems.


Prior to the National Academies of Sciences report, government regulators, including the EPA,
sewer plant managers, and sludge haulers, insisted sludge was safe when applied according to
the rules.


Houston-based Synagro manages sludge biosolids for municipalities in 35 states. Vice President
for government relations, Bob O’dette says there’s been plenty of studies already.


“If I thought for a moment that this caused anybody any health problems, I wouldn’t be in the
industry. I formed my opinion on biosolids before I came into the private sector.”


Problems have been pointed out. But the Federal Office of Inspector General reported in 2002
that the EPA offers virtually no federal oversight over sludge disposal and the agency is not
protecting the public. Those in the agency that tried to point out the problems were pressured or
fired.


Dr. David Lewis says he warned his bosses that using sludge might cause health problems. He
worked as a research microbiologist at the EPA’s national exposure research laboratory in
Georgia. He was fired last May. He alleges in whistleblower lawsuits that the EPA – which not
only regulates, but also promotes recycling sludge biosolids as fertilizer – wanted his sludge
research stopped.


“I can assure you that many of the issues raised by private citizens are issues that are raised and
that many scientists at EPA share those concerns and have from the beginning because of the
concerns over pathogens, metals and other contaminants in sludge and that concerns the risk that
might be present for public health and the environment.”


Lewis says although many viruses and bacteria die in the field, especially when exposed to
sunlight, the biggest risk of infection comes from what grows in the sludge after it’s put down.
Bacterial pathogens grow when the organic matter decomposes. He says it’s just like meat that’s
cooked and then left out on the counter. Some nasty stuff can start growing.


But now the EPA indicates it is ready to make changes. It plans to spend nearly six-million
dollars over the next three years following some of the advice of the National Academy of
Science study. Geff Grubbs is the EPA’s director of science and technology.


“We’re looking at what are the possible impacts and risks to people who live near and would
otherwise be exposed to pollutants that are emitted into the air from biosolids as they’re applied
to land. We’ll be conducting an analysis of samples of biosolids from various points across the
country to help determine the concentrations of additional pollutants that could impact health.”


The EPA says it will first look at health studies of people who claim to have become sick from
exposure to sludge. And it hopes to work with the Centers for Disease Control and state health
departments to arrange for them to track and investigate alleged cases of sludge sickness.


Environmentalists and others say they hope this is a more science-based look at the issue, but
they remain skeptical.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Amy Tardif.

Related Links

Midwest Fertilizer Use Causing Gulf Dead Zone?

  • Commercial shrimpers and fishers in the Gulf of Mexico cannot find anything alive in the 'dead zone.' Research indicates fertilizer runoff from Midwest farms causes the 'dead zone.' (Photo by Lester Graham)

Farmers and lawn care companies in the Midwest use fertilizer to grow better crops and greener lawns. But excess fertilizer is washed downstream by rain, eventually reaching the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists say once in the Gulf, it triggers a process that causes a so-called ‘Dead Zone.’ The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

Farmers and lawn care companies in the Midwest use fertilizer to grow better crops and greener
lawns. But excess fertilizer is washed downstream by rain, eventually reaching the Gulf of
Mexico. Scientists say once in the Gulf, it triggers a process that causes a so-called ‘Dead Zone.’
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


To get better crop production farmers use anhydrous ammonia to increase nitrogen levels in the
soil. To get greener lawns, homeowners use fertilizers that also can increase nitrogen and other
nutrient levels. But excess nitrogen gets carried away by rainstorms. For all or parts of 31 states,
that nitrogen is washed into ditches and creeks and rivers that are all part of the Mississippi River
basin. All of that land drains into the Mississippi and the Mississippi drains into the Gulf of
Mexico.


Tracy Mehan was the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Assistant Administrator for
Water. Mehan points out that’s a lot of runoff that ends up in one place…


“It affects most of the inland drainage of the United States from Minnesota, from Ohio, from
Nebraska, Missouri, Iowa, Illinois all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico. So, we’re dealing
with a tremendously broad system here and with tremendous challenges to protect the Gulf of
Mexico.”


Challenges because the nitrogen and other nutrients cause a problem.


Nancy Rabalais is a professor with the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium. She says the
nitrogen causes a huge bloom of algae…


“Well, the nutrients stimulate the growth of plants just like fertilizers stimulate the growth of a
corn plant. But the plants in the Gulf are microscopic algae.”


Some of the algae is eaten by tiny aquatic animals and fish. But, with a huge algal bloom… some
of it just dies and sinks to the bottom. Those algae cells are consumed by bacteria that also
consume oxygen. Rabalais says that depletes the oxygen in the surrounding water…


“So what basically happens is that the production of algae is just too much for the system to
handle.”


This oxygen starvation is called hypoxia. Marine life can’t live in a hypoxic area. Fish avoid it if
they can by swimming away. Other life that can’t move that fast dies. The size of the hypoxic
zone varies from year to year. Weather across the nation affects the amount of runoff that ends
up in the Gulf, but the trend has been a dead zone that’s gotten bigger over the past twenty
years… and according to Rabalais’ research it has doubled in size since the 1950’s when nitrogen
started being used extensively in agriculture.


(sound of boat engine starting up)


In Louisiana, the commercial fishers and shrimpers are concerned about the ‘dead zone.’ Some of
the smaller operations find it difficult to travel the longer distances to find fish outside the ‘dead
zone.’


Nelwyin McInnis is with the environmental organization, the Nature Conservancy. Walking in a
marsh area in Louisiana, she talked how important it was to that region that farmers and
homeowners in the Midwest do something to try to cut back on the amount of fertilizer that ends
up in the Gulf of Mexico.


“Certainly any ways that you can reduce the fertilizer runoff would certainly be of value. And I
know each farmer can’t imagine their impact hundreds of miles away in the Gulf of Mexico, but
each one adds up and has an effect.”


But powerful agricultural interests say the ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf of Mexico is not caused by
nitrogen fertilizers in the farm belt. The American Farm Bureau has kept up a steady campaign
of denial of responsibility. Reports and essays published by the Farm Bureau question researcher
Nancy Rabalais’ findings. Rabalais says the Farm Bureau can question her all it wants. Her
published work has been reviewed by other scientists in close to a dozen major scientific journals.


“We don’t believe in collecting data and putting it on a shelf. We get it to the scientific public and
we also try to translate it so that the public, including the agricultural community can understand
what it’s saying.”


Whether the agriculture community wants to hear what those data are saying is another question.
However, the government is taking it seriously and is looking at ways to reduce the amount of
nutrients being washed into the Gulf of Mexico.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

MIDWEST FERTILIZER USE CAUSING GULF DEAD ZONE? (Short Version)

  • Commercial shrimpers and fishers in the Gulf of Mexico cannot find anything alive in the 'dead zone.' Research indicates fertilizer runoff from Midwest farms causes the 'dead zone.' (Photo by Lester Graham)

The commercial fishers in the Gulf of Mexico are hoping the farmers in the Midwest help them solve a problem. The fishers and shrimpers say the farmers could help reduce a so-called ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:

Transcript

The commercial fishers in the Gulf of Mexico are hoping the farmers in the Midwest help them
solve a problem. The fishers and shrimpers say the farmers could help reduce a so-called ‘dead
zone’ in the Gulf. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:


The ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf of Mexico varies in size from year to year, sometimes getting larger
than the state of New Jersey. Scientists say excess nitrogen and other nutrients used to grow
crops and lawns in the Midwest are drained from the Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio river basins
and into the Gulf. Nancy Rabalais is a researcher with the Louisiana Universities Marine
Consortium. She says the result is a huge algae bloom in the Gulf…


“The nutrients stimulate the growth of these algae and they’re either eaten by zooplankton or fish
and become part of the marine food web or they die and sink to the bottom. It’s the cells that sink
to the bottom that eventually lead to the consumption of oxygen by bacteria.”


Fish and shrimp can’t live in the oxygen-starved area. The researchers say the only thing that can
reduce the size of the ‘dead zone’ is to reduce the amount of nitrogen from the Midwest that drains
into the Gulf of Mexico.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Downsides of Dam Removal

States have been removing old dams from rivers for safety and environmental reasons. But researchers say water managers should be sure to take a close look when considering dam removal as an option because, in some cases, it might be bad for the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:

Transcript

States have been removing old dams from rivers for safety and
environmental reasons. But researchers say water managers should be
sure to take a close look when considering dam removal as an option
because, in some cases, it might be bad for the environment. The Great
Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mark Brush has more:


This year, 45 dams are slated for removal across the country. Half of
those dams are in this region.


Emily Stanley is a river ecologist at the University of Wisconsin.
She’s been studying rivers after a dam has been removed and recently
published her findings in the journal “BioScience.” She
says in farm country, dams can help trap fertilizers that have been
over-applied on nearby fields.


“Small reservoirs can act like wetlands, and can be effective filters
for removing the nitrogen that has come in off of farm fields through
groundwater into the system, and can be actually some valuable points
of improving water quality.”


Stanley says, in many cases, sediments have been collecting behind the
dams for decades. When the dam is removed, the sediments are suddenly
released downstream and can lead to harmful algae blooms. In some
cases, the sediments can contain more dangerous substances, such heavy
metals and PCB’s. Stanley says communities should be sure to weigh the
environmental consequences before removing a dam.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mark Brush.

Earthworms Alter Forest Ecology

Most of us think of earthworms as beneficial creatures. Gardeners are always happy to spot a worm in the flowerbed because they add fertilizer to the soil. Many anglers say they’re the best thing for catching fish. But scientists are beginning to learn worms aren’t so friendly to Great Lakes forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports:

Transcript

Most of us think of earthworms as beneficial creatures. Gardeners are always happy to spot a
worm in the flowerbed because they add fertilizer to the soil. And many anglers say they’re the
best thing for catching fish. But scientists are beginning to learn worms aren’t so friendly to
Great Lakes forests. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Stephanie Hemphill reports.


(fade up Girl Scouts)


This Girl Scout troop is learning about worms. Judy Gibbs is a naturalist at the Hartley Nature
Center in Duluth. She shows the girls how to coax worms out of the soil. They pour water laced
with powdered mustard into the worms’ burrows.


It irritates the worms and they come squiggling up by the hundreds.


“Pour it in. Wait a minute. Here it comes. It doesn’t like the mustard and it comes right up.
Look at this one (laughter). oh, there’s another one. Look at it go!” (shrieks)


On their walk through the woods, the girls look for dead leaves. There aren’t many. Judy Gibbs
explains why.


“Here’s a leaf stem that’s being pulled into this hole. Who’s doing this? Ants! No. Worms.
There’s big night crawlers. You know what a night crawler is? They grow straight down into the
ground, and they come up at night and pull leaves down into their burrows. And they eat the leaf
right off. That’s why we’re not finding any leaves.”


Worms eating leaves might seem natural, but it turns out these worms aren’t native to these
woods. The last glacier buried most of what is now the Great Lakes region. When it melted,
plants and animals returned to create a community of maples, pines, songbirds, and tender plants
growing on the forest floor, like trillium…but not earthworms.


Cindy Hale is a biologist who studies the native wildflowers that grow in northern hardwood
forests. She loves the spring bloomers that take root in the spongy layer of decaying leaves on
the forest floor. Trillium, bloodroot, solomon’s seal.


Hale says many of these plants are disappearing.


“Sites that forty years ago were carpets of trillium have been slowly over the last two decades
declining to almost nothing, and people were scratching their heads, trying to figure out just
what’s going on.”


Earthworm populations are thickest close to cities. But Hale says people bring worms with them
when they come to the woods.


At first, settlers carried them in, along with the animals and plants they brought from Europe or
the east coast. These days, worms are spread by people who drive in the woods – loggers, ATV
riders…


“But in particular, fishing bait is a huge way that worms get moved around in our region.
Because there’s so many lakes and so much fishing.”


Hale and her colleagues set up test plots along an advancing line of worms in the Chippewa
National Forest in central Minnesota. The worms crawl about three yards further into the forest
each year. Hale is studying how the soil and the plants have changed as the worms advance.


Worms eat the decaying leaves on the forest floor. They mix that organic matter into the mineral
soil beneath it. And in time, they can use up all the organic matter and leave only mineral soil
behind.


That means the plants that have evolved to take root in the leaves on top of the soil have lost their
home.


Hale says these changes could affect every plant and animal that lives in the woods. She says,
for instance, even birds have declined by nearly 50% in the last fourteen years.


“Because ovenbirds nest in that forest floor, so if you lose the forest floor, then you may well
affect ground-nesting birds such as that. So when you start thinking about it, the potential
ramifications across the ecosystem get really wild.”


Hale says one of the big challenges in studying this problem is that there’s been very little basic
research – like how many worms are there are and where.


To gather more information and to get more people involved, Hale created a web-based learning
program. She’s asking teachers from around the country to have their classes do worm counts
and other research. Hale plans to add their data to the web page.


In Minnesota, the Department of Natural Resources is working with interest groups to try to slow
the spread of worms. Next year’s fishing regulations will include instructions not to dump your
worms at the end of a day of fishing.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Stephanie Hemphill in Duluth.

Land Where Water Runs Free

Summers in the Midwest mean corn, county fairs and lots of heat and humidity, but while some seasonal traditions remain intact, Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Julia King recently discovered that at least one significant summer custom is slipping away:

MIDWEST FERTILIZERS CREATE ‘DEAD-ZONE’

Fertilizer used in the Great Lakes states and the Midwest might be causing a wider dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico than ever before. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham has the story:

CUBA SETS EXAMPLE FOR ORGANIC FARMERS (Part 2)

  • Cuban growers examine their crops. Farmers in Cuba have been successful in growing their own crops after the Soviet Union collapsed ten years ago. Photo by Mary Stucky

Cuba is in the midst of an unprecedented experiment in alternative agriculture… an experiment that’s attracting the attention of farmers in the Great Lakes. When the Soviet Union collapsed ten years ago, so did Cuba’s economy. Lacking money to import food or the chemicals to grow it, the Cuban government made a bold move — embracing organic farming and natural pest control. In the second of a two-part series, the Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky takes a look at the lessons farmers may learn from Cuba’s organic experiment:

Transcript

Cuba is in the midst of an unprecedented experiment in alternative agriculture… an experiment that’s attracting the attention of farmers in the Great Lakes. When the Soviet Union collapsed ten years ago, so did Cuba’s economy. Lacking money to import food and the chemicals to grow it, the Cuban government made a bold move – embracing organic farming and natural pest control. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Mary Stucky takes a look at the lessons Great Lakes farmers may learn from Cuba’s organic experiment.


The agricultural transformation in Cuba is striking. In a land only recently dependent on imported chemicals, much of the farmland is now cultivated without chemical fertilizer or chemical pest controls. In a land where people were once starving, a vast system of urban gardens are producing more than half of the fruits and vegetables consumed in Cuba, completely without the use of chemicals. So while certain foods like meat and milk are in short supply, the United Nations reports that most Cubans are now consuming enough calories for a healthy life.
There’s a pride in proving alternative agricultural methods can feed a country’s people. Fernando Funes made that point in the busy lunchroom at the agricultural research facility he runs near Havana.


“In the whole world we are a handful of people trying to go ahead with this struggle and we have to show that we are producing more healthy products that is healthy for nature. I don’t know what will happen in the future but I guess in my opinion, we are not going to come back because we have been proving very well that this paradigm is going to substitute the other one.”


Funes is out to spread the message that even the most chemical fertilizer and pesticide dependent farming can be transformed. Folks like the University of Minnesota’s Bill Wilcke are listening. Wilcke was recently in Cuba studying its agricultural innovations.


“Their solution is ‘what do we have to fix the problem,’ trying to make use of their natural resources and their own human resources to make this work.”


It’s not that they don’t use any fertilizer, or pest controls – they do. It’s just that they involve far less chemicals. For instance, Cuba’s approach to fertilizer involves the production of worm humus in so-called vermiculture facilities – where staff regularly invites curious American farmers to visit.


“We use commonly just manure, but also the kitchen residues and many other organic matters. They eat double their size.”


This Cuban farmer explains how they feed manure or garbage to the worms, which then transform it into a richer, more potent fertilizer. That fertilizer has been used to dramatically improve yields for some crops in Cuba.


(Ambient sound from lab)


Throughout rural Cuba there are more than 200 centers for the production of natural pest controls – including bacteria that devour insect larvae. That’s an inexpensive – and largely effective – alternative to chemical pesticides. Alternatives such as these are well known in the United States. But because of the ready availability of chemicals and because alternatives don’t work well on some big cash crops, they’re little used in the U.S. right now. Still, developing alternatives makes good sense to the University of Minnesota’s Bill Willcke.


“I don’t know if we need to advocate abandoning technology, but I think we need to think about what some of our options are and we have to think about the scale of our agriculture, the kinds of technology that we use.’


Some economists say it’s foolish for countries like the U.S. to imitate Cuba. They say, why go back to what some call medieval farming methods, why use valuable urban land to grow food. But Minor Sinclair disagrees. Sinclair lived in Havana in the 1990’s, representing Oxfam America, a charity working on food policy. Sinclair says Cuba may be sitting on a gold mine, with the increasing demand for organic food.


“Will Cuba’s agriculture be able to be a lighthouse for other developing countries in the region, and in some way even for farmers here in the United States. I hope so.”


Maybe someday, but most experts do not expect to see a system of organic farming and urban gardens widely embraced in the U.S. any time soon, at least not without a food crisis of Cuban proportions.


For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Mary Stucky.

Commentary – The Quest for Purity

The USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service is proposing national rulesfor organic food production. The new rules are an attempt tostandardize labeling and quality. But as they are now written, theywill still allow irradiation, genetically altered food and syntheticfertilizers…And that has Great Lakes Radio Consortium Commentator JuliaKing worried: