The Fight of the Ego vs. Clean Water: Urgent Challenges and Global Comparisons
Abstract:
This in-depth scientific article analysis and explores the pressing issue of clean water in the United States, emphasizing the need to address the prevailing ignorance surrounding this critical matter. Written from the perspective of a medical doctor who has resided in Miami for the past five years and gained extensive international experience, the article presents a respectful and scientific examination of the clean water challenges faced by major U.S. cities. Through comprehensive data analysis, including percentages and scientific measurements, and by comparing these challenges with counterparts around the world, the article highlights the urgency, the water quality challenges, and the implications of inaction. Furthermore, the article delves into a future projection for 2050, outlining the potential consequences of maintaining the current course.
Keywords: clean water, United States, global comparisons, urgent challenges, public health, environmental impact.
- Introduction:
Clean water is a fundamental pillar of public health, yet the United States faces grave water-related issues that often go overlooked. This article presents a comprehensive analysis and delves into the water crises encountered by major U.S. cities, including New York City, and Miami. By adopting a scientific approach while conducting a comparative analysis with selected international cities, such as Copenhagen and Toronto, we aim to raise awareness and stimulate necessary action to safeguard the nation's water resources highlighting the extent of water quality issues and emphasizing the urgent need for action.
- Methods:
To assess the water crises in the selected cities, extensive data were collected and analyzed from reputable sources, including government reports, scientific studies, and water quality indices. Through meticulous research, this study examines the clean water crises in two prominent U.S. cities: New York City and Miami. This includes testing for microbiological organisms, chemical compounds, and potential pollutants. These cities are chosen for their population density, geographic diversity, and representative nature. Various parameters were considered, including water contamination levels, infrastructure conditions, water conservation efforts, and overall water management practices. Comparative analyses were performed with select cities from different regions worldwide, including Copenhagen and Toronto. The collected data was evaluated and presented using percentages to provide a clear comparison between the U.S. cities and their international counterparts.
- Results and Discussion:
The findings of our analysis reveal stark disparities in water quality, infrastructure, and conservation efforts between U.S. cities and their international counterparts, highlighting significant concerns. The situation is further exacerbated by three crucial factors that demand immediate attention. Firstly, it is essential to note that most of the water quality tests conducted in the United States are primarily focused on the water source rather than on the final destinations where it is consumed. This approach overlooks potential issues that may arise during the transportation and distribution processes, leading to an incomplete understanding of the overall water quality.
Secondly, the current legal limits set for contaminants in U.S. tap water are based on outdated health guidelines. It is important to recognize that adhering to these legal limits does not necessarily guarantee the safety of the water for human, animal, and plant consumption. Relying solely on regulatory compliance and assuming that if it is legal, it is safe disregards the scientific knowledge and research that defines what truly constitutes safe water.
Lastly, and perhaps most concerning, is the fact that legal limits for contaminants in tap water have not been updated in nearly two decades. As scientific understanding and research progress, it is crucial to regularly reassess and update these limits to reflect the latest health standards and ensure the protection of public health. Failing to do so can result in a significant lag between emerging contaminants and their potential risks to human well-being.
Addressing these issues requires a comprehensive approach that encompasses rigorous testing throughout the entire water distribution system, aligning legal limits with the latest health guidelines, and establishing a regular review process to update these limits. By doing so, we can bridge the gap between current practices and scientific advancements, ensuring the provision of safe and clean water for all communities.
- New York City
New York City's drinking water is sourced from an extensive network of reservoirs and lakes located in upstate New York. The primary water source for the city is the Catskill/Delaware Watersheds, situated approximately 125 miles (201 kilometers) north of New York City. This robust water supply system delivers over one billion gallons of drinking water each day, serving more than 8.8 million residents of New York City and an additional one million individuals residing in Westchester, Putnam, Orange, and Ulster counties.
Strict enforcement against illegal dumping, thanks to the efforts of the police, has played a vital role in protecting the conduits that transport water to the city. The water from the vast reservoirs and lakes is conveyed to New York City through the New Croton, Delaware, and Catskill Aqueducts, ultimately being stored in the Kensico and Hillview reservoirs in Westchester County. From there, the tap water flows into the five boroughs, ensuring access to clean and reliable drinking water for the city's population.
New York City's tap water is often hailed as the "champagne" of waters, owing in part to the geology of the Catskill Mountains, which have minimal limestone rock, resulting in low levels of bitter-tasting calcium in the water supply.
While New York City is renowned for its excellence in drinking water treatment and serving as the gold standard for the largest metropolitan area in the United States, challenges arise when the water encounters the aging infrastructure. The city's aging water systems and industrial contamination pose significant threats to water quality. Studies indicate that approximately 35% of New York City's water sources exhibit detectable levels of contaminants, including lead, pharmaceuticals, and emerging pollutants, upon entering the city's antiquated water system. The presence of aging infrastructure and combined sewer systems further exacerbates the water quality challenges faced by the city.
In New York City, 12% of water samples collected from households exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guidelines for lead content exceeding 12 parts per billion (ppb)(New York City Environmental Protection, 2023) The highest lead concentration detected from a residential tap was 152 ppb. Lead contamination enters the tap water through old lead service pipes and lead-containing plumbing. The Environmental Protection Agency, Center for Disease Control, and the American Academy of Pediatrics all acknowledge that there is no safe level of lead for children. Compounding the issue, out of the city's 8 million residents, only 375 residential homes were sampled for lead, with 24 of those samples exceeding the federal Action Level. The limited number of sampling sites does not adequately represent the extent of the lead problem in New York City's drinking water.
Comprehensive measures must be taken to address these challenges and ensure the provision of safe and clean drinking water to all residents of New York City.
These are some of the contaminants detected in New York City that exceed the latest health guidelines:
1) Haloacetic acids (HAA9): Haloacetic acids are formed when disinfectants such as chlorine are added to tap water. The group of nine haloacetic acids includes monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid, which are regulated as a group by the federal government (HAA5); and bromochloroacetic acid, bromodichloroacetic acid, chlorodibromoacetic acid, and tribromoacetic acid.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
892 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.06 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
53.5 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
2) Haloacetic acids (HAA5): Haloacetic acids are formed when disinfectants such as chlorine are added to tap water. The group of five haloacetic acids regulated by federal standards includes monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
379 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.1 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
37.9 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
60 ppb |
3) Chloroform: Chloroform, one of the total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), is formed when chlorine or other disinfectants are used to treat drinking water. Chloroform and other disinfection byproducts increase the risk of cancer and may cause problems during pregnancy.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
80 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.4 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
32.1 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
4) Dichloroacetic acid: Dichloroacetic acid, one of the groups of five haloacetic acids regulated by federal standards, is formed when chlorine or other disinfectants are used to treat drinking water. Haloacetic acids and other disinfection byproducts increase the risk of cancer and may cause problems during pregnancy.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
75 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.2 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
15 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
5) Bromodichloromethane: Bromodichloromethane, one of the total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), is formed when chlorine or other disinfectants are used to treat drinking water. Bromodichloromethane and other disinfection byproducts increase the risk of cancer and may cause problems during pregnancy.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
73 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.06 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
4.40 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
6) Bromoform: Bromoform, one of the total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), is formed when chlorine or other disinfectants are used to treat drinking water. Bromoform and other disinfection byproducts increase the risk of cancer and may cause problems during pregnancy.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
2.8 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.5 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
1.42 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
7) Dibromochloromethane: Dibromochloromethane, one of the total trihalomethanes (TTHMs), is formed when chlorine or other disinfectants are used to treat drinking water. Dibromochloromethane and other disinfection byproducts increase the risk of cancer and may cause problems during pregnancy.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
2.3 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.1 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
0.225 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
8) Chromium (hexavalent): Chromium (hexavalent) is a carcinogen that commonly contaminates American drinking water. Chromium (hexavalent) in drinking water may be due to industrial pollution or natural occurrences in mineral deposits and groundwater.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
2.1 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.2 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
0.0413 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
Earlier this year, a concerning report emerged, indicating that on any given day, there was a distressing 50% likelihood that sewage and trash from the city rendered the water along New York City's shorelines unsafe to touch. This revelation is accompanied by an even more alarming statistic: approximately 20 billion gallons of untreated raw sewage and runoff are bypassing our sewage treatment plants, ultimately finding their way into the water surrounding the five boroughs. This unabated discharge of untreated waste poses a significant threat to both the ecological health of the waterways and the well-being of those who encounter these contaminated waters. Urgent action is imperative to address this critical issue and protect the precious water resources of New York City for the sake of both the environment and public health.
- Miami
Florida relies heavily on groundwater sources for tap water, and Miami is no exception. In Miami-Dade County, the local Biscayne Aquifer serves as the primary drinking water source. Situated just beneath the land surface in South Florida, this aquifer consists of porous rock with tiny cracks and holes that allow rainwater to seep in and fill it. As the water moves through the aquifer, it naturally dissolves minerals and can also pick up substances resulting from human or animal activities.
However, groundwater is susceptible to contamination from various sources. Power plants, landfills, hazardous waste sites, and agricultural farms all have the potential to release impurities into the ground, which can eventually find their way into the water supply.
To provide clean drinking water, the Miami Dade Water and Sewer Authority operates three regional water treatment plants. The water undergoes a series of processes, including softening, disinfection with chlorine and ammonia to form chloramine, fluoridation, and filtration. After treatment, it is stored in underground reservoirs and tanks.
Florida is highly susceptible to hurricanes and the impacts of climate change, including sea-level rise. Miami, like many other cities worldwide, faces water scarcity. Despite having abundant water sources, most of it is salty ocean water. The water scarcity issue in Miami is primarily due to environmental pollution, not overconsumption. The Biscayne Aquifer, which is shallow and composed of porous limestone, is particularly vulnerable to saltwater intrusion caused by rising sea levels. At present, Miami's water treatment plants are unable to desalinate water.
According to studies, approximately 20% of Miami's water sources are affected by saltwater intrusion, exacerbated by rising sea levels and inadequate water management practices. Inadequate management and water quality control further amplify the critical threat to clean water in the region. Additionally, certain water bodies in Miami experience harmful algal blooms (HABs) due to excessive nutrient runoff, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus. These HABs can release toxins into the water, posing risks to human health and the ecosystem.
Miami's freshwater resources are also vulnerable to increased rainfall and flooding. Since the 1960s, heavy rainfall has increased by 7%, leading to more severe floods that not only damage homes and roads but also carry toxins and pollutants from contaminated sites into the Biscayne Aquifer. Limited capacity in water treatment plants hampers their ability to handle heavy flows, resulting in the discharge of untreated wastewater into waterways.
Similar to other major American cities, Miami's infrastructure is aging, which contributes to leaks, breaks, and contamination risks, including lead and microplastics. Miami has been found to have higher levels of microplastics compared to other cities. A study published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology estimated that the average person could ingest around 5 microplastic particles per 500 mL of water each week, assuming daily consumption of 2 liters of water.
These are some of the contaminants detected in Miami that exceed the latest health guidelines:
1) Haloacetic acids (HAA9): Haloacetic acids are formed when disinfectants such as chlorine are added to tap water. The group of nine haloacetic acids includes monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid, which are regulated as a group by the federal government (HAA5); and bromochloroacetic acid, bromodichloroacetic acid, chlorodibromoacetic acid, and tribromoacetic acid.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
627 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.06 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
37.6 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
2) Haloacetic acids (HAA5): Haloacetic acids are formed when disinfectants such as chlorine are added to tap water. The group of five haloacetic acids regulated by federal standards includes monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
286 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.1 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
28.6 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
60 ppb |
3) Arsenic: Arsenic is a potent carcinogen and common contaminant in drinking water. Arsenic causes thousands of cases of cancer each year in the U.S.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
243 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.004 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
0.971 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
10 ppb |
4) Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs): Trihalomethanes are cancer-causing contaminants that form during water treatment with chlorine and other disinfectants. The total trihalomethanes group includes four chemicals: chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and bromoform.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
221 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.15 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
33.1 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
80 ppb |
5) Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS): a member of a group of perfluorinated chemicals used in many consumer products. PFOS and other perfluorinated chemicals can cause serious health effects, including cancer, endocrine disruption, accelerated puberty, liver and immune system damage, and thyroid changes. These chemicals are persistent in the environment, and they accumulate in people.
|
Potential Effect: |
Multiple |
|
The amount found: |
7.2 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
1 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
7.17 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
4 ppb |
6) Perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHPA): is a member of a group of perfluorinated chemicals used in many consumer products. Perfluorinated chemicals can cause serious health effects, including cancer, endocrine disruption, accelerated puberty, liver and immune system damage, and thyroid changes. These chemicals are persistent in the environment, and they accumulate in people.
|
Potential Effect: |
Multiple |
|
The amount found: |
5.5 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
1 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
5.5 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
7) Chromium (hexavalent): is a carcinogen that commonly contaminates American drinking water. Chromium (hexavalent) in drinking water may be due to industrial pollution or natural occurrences in mineral deposits and groundwater.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
4.3 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.02 ppb or less |
|
Founded: |
0.0857 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
8) Radium, combined (-226 and - 228): is a radioactive element that causes bone cancer and other cancers. It can occur naturally in groundwater, and oil and gas extraction activities such as hydraulic fracturing can elevate concentrations.
|
Potential Effect: |
Cancer |
|
The amount found: |
3.3 times above the health guidelines |
|
Health Guideline: |
0.05 pCi/L or less |
|
Founded: |
0.17 ppb |
|
Legal Limit: |
No Legal Limit |
- Copenhagen
Copenhagen, Denmark, stands out as a global leader in water management and sustainability. The city has implemented innovative strategies to protect and preserve its water resources. It utilizes advanced wastewater treatment technologies and employs a dual-water system that separates drinking water from wastewater. This approach ensures the highest quality drinking water while maximizing resource efficiency. Copenhagen's proactive measures, including rainwater harvesting and groundwater replenishment, contribute to sustainable water management and reduce reliance on external water sources.
- Toronto
Toronto, Canada, has also prioritized sustainable water management practices. The city recognizes the importance of protecting its water sources, such as Lake Ontario and various reservoirs. Toronto focuses on source water protection, investing in watershed management programs, and conservation efforts. The city's infrastructure upgrades, including the implementation of green infrastructure solutions, contribute to improved water quality and resilience. Toronto's commitment to proactive water management positions it as a model for other cities facing similar challenges.
- Comparative Analysis
When comparing New York City and Miami with Copenhagen and Toronto, notable disparities emerge. While New York City and Miami face significant water quality challenges due to aging infrastructure and contamination, Copenhagen and Toronto showcase more proactive approaches to water management and conservation. These cities prioritize source water protection, employ advanced treatment technologies, and invest in sustainable infrastructure upgrades.
The percentages of detectable contaminants in New York City's water sources, along with the aging infrastructure issues, underscore the urgency for improved water management practices. Similarly, Miami's water crisis, exacerbated by sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion, necessitates resilient strategies for water supply and infrastructure development.
Copenhagen and Toronto demonstrate that sustainable water management is achievable through proactive measures. Their focus on source water protection, advanced treatment systems, and infrastructure upgrades sets a benchmark for cities worldwide. By adopting similar strategies, cities facing water crises can enhance water quality, ensure resource efficiency, and promote long-term sustainability.
- Projections:
Looking ahead to 2050, if the current trajectory continues, the consequences of neglecting proper water management and infrastructure investments could be severe. It is projected that without significant interventions, water scarcity could affect 45% of the global population by 2050 (World Wildlife Fund, 2022). Additionally, climate change-induced sea-level rise may exacerbate saltwater intrusion into freshwater sources, threatening coastal cities like Miami (South Florida Water Management District, 2023). Failure to address these challenges could result in dire consequences by 2050, including widespread waterborne diseases, diminished agricultural productivity, and significant socio-economic impacts. Therefore, it is imperative to prioritize sustainable water management, invest in infrastructure upgrades, and implement stringent regulatory measures to ensure a cleaner, healthier future.
4. Conclusion:
In conclusion, the water crises encountered in New York City and Miami highlight the need for improved infrastructure, contamination mitigation, and conservation efforts. By drawing insights from cities like Copenhagen and Toronto, where proactive measures have been successful, cities worldwide can develop effective strategies to address their water challenges and secure a sustainable future.
The United States must confront its ego-driven disregard for the critical issue of clean water. This article provides a scientific analysis of the urgent clean water challenges faced by major U.S. cities, emphasizing the need for immediate action. By drawing comparisons with global counterparts, we underscore the gravity of the situation and stress the importance of sustainable water management practices. It is only through collective efforts and a shift in mindset that we can secure a healthier future for generations to come.
Acknowledgments:
The author acknowledges the invaluable insights and experiences gained through interactions with experts in the field of water management and public health. Their contributions have greatly enriched this study.
Disclosure:
The author declares no conflicts of interest or financial support related to this research.
Useful References:
- United Nations. (2010). The Human Right to Water and Sanitation. Reference: https://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml
- World Health Organization (WHO) and United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). (2019). Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene: 2000-2017: Special Focus on Inequalities. Geneva: World Health Organization. Reference: https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/jmp-report-2019/en/
- United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2021). Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories. Reference: https://www.epa.gov/ground-water-and-drinking-water/drinking-water-standards-and-health-advisories
- United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2021). Water Quality Information: Frequently Asked Questions. Reference: https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/water-quality-information-frequently-asked-questions
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2021). Water-Related Diseases and Contaminants in Public Water Systems. Reference: https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/public/water_diseases.html
- American Water Works Association (AWWA). (2019). Water Quality & Treatment: A Handbook on Drinking Water. Reference: https://www.awwa.org/Portals/0/AWWA/ETS/Resources/Handbooks/Water-Quality-and-Treatment-Handbook-7th-Edition-Sample-Chapter.pdf
- United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - Water: The EPA provides information on water quality standards, regulations, and various aspects of water management in the United States. Their website is a valuable resource for understanding the government's role in ensuring clean water. Reference: U.S. EPA website - https://www.epa.gov/water
- New York City Environmental Protection: Information on the city's water supply, quality, and infrastructure. It offers resources related to drinking water quality reports, lead testing, and water conservation efforts. Reference: NYC Environmental Protection website - https://www1.nyc.gov/site/dep/index.page
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): The health effects of various contaminants in drinking water, including lead and disinfection byproducts. Reference: CDC website - https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/index.html
- World Health Organization (WHO): Global guidelines and resources on water quality and safety. Reference: WHO website - https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/en/
- The Environmental Protection Agency: Tackles drinking water contamination from the toxic "forever chemicals" known as PFAS. Reference: https://www.ewg.org/tapwater/system.php?pws=NY7003493