SEARCHING FOR TRUTH IN SCIENCE

"Heartless science seeks truth, and truth alone, quite apart from any consequences that may arise."--Alexander Graham Bell

Bell demonstrated his concept of heartless science in his feverish labor, with much personal sacrifice, to invent a metal detector which could be used to locate an assassin's bullet in the back of President Garfield. Although it was perfected too late to help the President, the device worked and was used into World War I, even though the x-ray became available.

Unfortunately, science is not always heartless; rather, it can be influenced by bias, agendas or even ignorance. Consequently, science may not always attain the truth idealized by Bell.

For example, in the late 1880s, many doctors in the United States rejected Lister's discovery and application of antisepsis. They also rejected Pasteur's discovery that germs cause illness, believing that if one cannot see germs then they do not exist.

More recently, scientists have asserted that ancient Maya writings have predicted that the earth will end December 21, 2012. Now, scientists have discovered other Maya writings showing that no such prediction was made. (Science News, August 11, 2012).

Many scientists have asserted that global warming is human caused. Recently, for example, a group has indicated that the probability Texas will experience hot, dry weather in a La Nina year increases 20 times due to human caused global warming. (Science News, August 11, 2012). On the other hand, scientists apparently were surprised this month by a report that the amount of carbon dioxide being released in the United States has fallen to its lowest level in 20 years. The decline has occurred due to market forces (cheaper natural gas), not by governmental fiat.

So how does Bell relate to water and waste water utilities? These utilities are subject to treatment standards, regulations and enforcement actions by federal and state regulatory agencies. These agencies are assumed to have scientific "expertise", their rules are assumed to be based on scientific truth, and their "authority" is assumed to be boundless.

These assumption may not be true, in point of fact. Thus, on August 21, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that EPA's rule regarding emissions from coal-burning power plants crossing state lines (Cross-State Air Pollution Rule) exceeded EPA's statutory authority. Earlier in the month, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held that EPA's rejection of the Texas permitting process for utilities and industrial plants had no basis in the Clean Air Act or its implementing regulations.

When new standards or regulations are proposed, water and waste water utilities should carefully review the basis and support for the proposals. They should consider questioning and commenting when opportunities arise, and challenging them when costs exceed benefits or scientific support appears lacking. Likewise, in the case of enforcement actions by regulators, allegations that may not have an evidentiary basis or appear to be beyond statutory authority should be defended against.

There are times when regulation can be heartless. But if regulation is not based upon scientific and legal truth, the potential consequences can justify challenge.

JUDICIAL LIMITS ON AGENCY AUTHORITY

Over the years, courts have applied several legal principles to limit the apparent exercise of authority by an administrative agency. One of the well-established principles is that an administrative agency has only those powers delegated to it by the statutes creating it. In other words, the agency's actions must be within the statutory scope of its jurisdiction and authority.

Another principle of administrative law is that an agency must follow its own rules. This concept, in effect, is one of procedural due process.

A Washington, DC, federal District Court decision issued this week arguably illustrates application of these two principles. The Court reviewed new, more stringent water quality standards promulgated by EPA to deal with mineral deposits in streams resulting from mountain top removal surface coal mining. The mining industry allegedly argued that the new standards were not issued in compliance with the agency's own rule making procedures, which include a requirement for formal notice and opportunity for public comment.

The District Court accepted the industry position and, in addition, in effect held that the agency exceeded its authority under the Clean Water Act. Interestingly, earlier this year another Washington District Court held that, when EPA revoked a permit for a mountain top removal mine, it exceeded its authority.

Recall that earlier this year, the Supreme Court rejected EPA's arguments to the contrary and held that there is a right to judicial review of EPA's compliance orders. That decision, along with the District Courts' opinions discussed above, appear to demonstrate the continuing importance of judicial restraints on agency actions which exceed its authority and may deny due process.

ARE WE REALLY POWERLESS?

It was a sunny, quiet Sunday afternoon...or so it seemed. I was sinking into my favorite, no-think chair scanning my favorite no-think newspaper. Suddenly, darkness. I turned on the reading lamp and continued my no-thinkng. Even more suddenly, a vicious wind howled, lightning and thunder came along with torrents of what appeared to be rain but included leaves and branches. And, click...the power went out and darkness without became darkness within.

I think, another electricity outage, one that probably will last for several days again.

I think, since we are on a private well, there will be no flushing of toilets. There will be no showers. There will be no washing of dishes or clothes. There will be no morning coffee or drink of water at the tap.

I think, the stuff in the freezer will melt, the stuff in the refrigerator will spoil and the microwave will not work.

I think, 100 degree days are forecast, and the air conditioning will not work, and I will melt and spoil.

I think, the television will not work and the computer will not work and the powered telephone will not work and my mobile phone will not recharge, and I will not be entertained or communicated.

I think, I will have no reading light for my no-think reading and no light for my evening darkness, which I probably will curse even with a candle.

Ah, I think, I can drive to my local grocery store and buy bottled water. And, I can drive to my local greasy spoon cafe for some greasy spoon food to eat...if they, of course, have electricity, if it really matters.

But...then I think, millions of people in the world would give anything to be in my perceived predicament. Three million people in the world every year die for lack of safe drinking water and safe sanitation disposal. These are the real power outages. Further, millions of people in the world have no indoor plumbing, no showers, no air conditioning, no refrigerators and freezers, no television and computers and no local grocery stores or local cafes.

I think, the United States every year gives billions of dollars of foreign aid to other countries for military purposes. I think, what if a large chunk of that giveaway were for safe drinking water and sanitation facilities. That would be real power...to save.

POLITICIANS, WAKE UP...IT'S THE WATER!

A recent article in the Wall Street Journal described current international concern over alleged "global warming" and energy as "feel-good environmentalism." In the United States, policy-makers' obsession over so-called "green energy" and energy regulation similarly may be masking a far more serious issue: water.

In the United States, as well as in other countries, there appear to be multiple sources of energy available to meet demand, including natural gas, coal, oil,solar, wind, nuclear, wood and even trash. Many of these sources seem nearly unlimited as a practical matter. On the other hand, there are only two sources of fresh drinking water--above ground and below ground--and fresh water is a very small portion of total water on earth.

According to the Journal article, world-wide about 3 million people die annually from lack of access to safe drinking water. In the United States, studies and concerns over sufficiency and quality of drinking water sources are becoming more and more common.

For example, in New Jersey, testing of private water wells by the Department of Environmental Pollution showed one out of eight wells exceeded safe limits for arsenic, alpha, mercury, nitrates or volatile organic compounds. (The Times, Trenton). The article stated that while some contaminants are naturally occurring, many were the ground water pollution result over over-development.

Along similar lines, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has announced the results of its study of New England bedrock ground water. In addition to naturally occurring contaminants, it found sodium, chlorides, nitrates, methyl-tert-butyl ether and chloroform attributable to human activities. (pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5220/)

Beside contamination of water sources of supply, there also is growing concern over sustainability of drinking water supplies. For example, a new study by USGS in conjunction with Maryland state agencies of an aquifer underlying the state is illustrative. The study found that the aquifer water is over a million years old, but is not recharging as fast as wells are pumping water from it.

The USGS Maryland study found that modern pumping rates have lowered water pressure and changed its chemistry, adversely affecting the aquifer's ability to meet fresh water demands. Further, concern over salt water intrusion has caused utilities to move from shallow aquifers to the deep aquifer, resulting in ground water levels to decline. (springerlink.com/content/j08u34jh46r632v4/?MUD=MP)

In Colorado, it was reported that farmers asked the governor to allow ground water wells to pump irrigation water because irrigation ditches are drying and crops were at risk. The governor declined on the ground that he did not have authority. The governor allegedly stated that pumping could adversely affect downstream flows in the South Platte River and owners of senior water rights downstream. Apparently, studies have shown that pumping of ground water in the area depletes river flows. (Greeley Tribune)

Fresh, safe drinking water is a very limited resource. Policy makers, governmental authorities and politicians should make such water--its availability, conservation, safety, and sustainability--an absolute priority. Human health and safety in this country and in the world is more critical than funding bankrupt solar panel manufacturers.

The Badlands of South Dakota are a hot, arid moon landscape. One of their residents is the short-horned lizard. It loves the Badlands because they are hot and there is little or no water there. When the temperature exceeds 100 degrees, the lizards bury themselves under rocks or in the soil to conserve water. Let is hope we will not evolve backwards into short-horned lizards.

EPA DOES LANDSCAPING

Most people are aware that USEPA regulates public water supplies under the Safe Drinking Water Act and wastewater disposal under the Clean Water Act. And, we know that EPA also fights bed bugs (see my posting January 16, 2012 "EPA Brings Bed Bugs To Justice"). Now we learn that EPA is in the landscaping business as well.

According to EPA'a June 5, 2012 press release, it has completed clean-up of arsenic-contaminated soil at some 600 homes in a South Minneapolis residential neighborhood (#12-OPA044). According to the press release, the neighborhood is near a location where a pesticide containing arsenic was produced for 30 years starting in 1938. "Contaminated material from an open-air conveyor belt railcar-unloading and product-mixing operation is believed to have been wind-blown into surrounding neighborhoods," according to EPA.

EPA removed over 50,000 tons of soil from the yards of the houses, refilled the yards with clean soil, and replanted the yards with new vegetation and grass.

The cost incurred by EPA for this work was $28,000,000. That works out to be approximately $46,000 per house. Residents of these houses paid nothing, although EPA said that the work "enhances the resale value of these properties."

GOOD WATER FOR GOLD SEEKERS

I just finished reading "All Roads Lead To Deadwood".* It is a book which details the many trails, and their travelers, on stage coaches and on oxen/mule freight wagons, heading to the gold camps of Deadwood, Black Hills, Dakota Territory, in 1876-90.

Passengers and freight originated from such towns as Cheyenne, Fort Pierre, Medora, Bismarck and Sidney. Gold discoveries were a magnet in the frontier West, and no magnet was stronger at the time than the gold deposits in Deadwood, particularly after Custer's 1874 expedition into the Black Hills.

Travel on these "roads" was hazardous. In Winter, there were blizzards and 40 degree below zero temperatures. In Spring, there were flash floods, rains that turned soil into mush, and swollen rivers to be crossed without benefit of bridges. And, at all times, there was the threat, and reality, of ambush by Indians and road agents.

Nevertheless, stage and freight outfits had concern for the "comforts" of travelers.
Each trail had stations about every 10 to 20 miles, where passengers and freighters would stop for a meal or rest, and horses, oxen and mules would be fed or changed.

While many of these stations offered alcoholic and entertainment opportunities, the book makes it clear that drinking water was a key feature of a successful rest stop operation. It describes many of the stations as "here was a fine well with good water." Stations generally had "good water" except for a few that had water termed "alkaline"-which tended to make travelers sick. One trail had an area of many springs, often simply called "holes". At some locations, a barn or shed would be built over a spring-the cold flowing water had the effect of creating refrigeration within the building.

At one relay station, on Oak Creek, there "was a watering stop with the well built into the bank of the stream. It had excellent water."(P.202) A trail from Sidney, Nebraska, had a stage stop where "the water from Beaver Creek was clear but cathartic caused by the high lithium content. Good water was available at five cents a bucket and three dollars for a wagon load-but the water was only for drinking as the women still made coffee from creek water." (P.80) No doubt, that morning coffee gave quite a wake-up!

For the most part, therefore, drinking water available to these travelers appeared to be simply "good", unless something obvious such as alkalinity made it "not good." There were, of course, no EPA, no Maximum Contaminant Levels, no primary or secondary drinking water standards and no regulations requiring treatment of water.

Interestingly, while the book details many situations when stage drivers and passengers and freighters were killed by Indians, bandits, weather or in fighting, it gives no indication that anyone died from drinking "good water." So, it seems, all who endured the hazards of travel then made it to Deadwood to seek their fortune. In 1890, the railroad reached Deadwood, and overland stages to the Hills road into history.

One may speculate that what made drinking water "good" at these stations was the fact that it came from wells, springs and streams untainted by "civilization." Perhaps it is a sad commentary on "modern" times that drinking water must be subjected to extensive governmental regulation and treatment because of the reality or simply perception that civilization has contaminated sources of supply. On the other hand, maybe I am still back in the 1880s, as I still get all my drinking water from an untreated well, and it is good.

______________________
*(Klock, 1979)

ROUNDING UP THE NOT USUAL WATER SUSPECTS

In 1935, Klaus Hansen was a pharmacologist at Oslo University. That year, he became the first human to drink something called "heavy" water.

Heavy water was discovered in 1931 in the United States by Harold Urey. What is heavy about this water? Ordinary water, the kind that pours from our faucets, is H20. Heavy water, also known as deuterium oxide, is D2O. Thus, in heavy water, deuterium, a heavy isotope
of hydrogen, replaces the hydrogen of ordinary water. Heavy water is about 10% heavier than ordinary water and has higher freezing and boiling levels.

Apparently, ice cubes made from heavy water will sink to the bottom of your gin and tonic. However, it is not recommended for that purpose. Instead, heavy water commonly is used as a moderator of neutrons produced in nuclear fission reactions in nuclear reactors. As one might guess, there also is something called "semi-heavy" water, where deuterium replaces only one of the hydrogen atoms of ordinary water, thus DHO.

So, what happened to Prof. Hansen after he drank the heavy stuff? Apparently, nothing. He lived past age 75.

Well if ordinary water is not to your taste, and heavy water not your cup of tea, are there other water alternatives? Why not consider "drinking" fruits and vegetables?

For example, there is the obvious choice--watermelon. Typically, watermelon is 92% water. Of course, watermelons tend to weigh a lot, so this could be said to be a form of heavy water. Watermelons are said to contain beneficial nutrients, as well. In fact, watermelons have their own website: watermelon.org. There also has been some suggestion that ingredients in watermelons may have male enhancement benefits. (sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080630165707.htm) There is no indication whether seeded or seedless melon is to be preferred. Of course, eating watermelon heartily could leave one bladder-challenged.

There are other choices for water, as well. Cucumbers and iceberg lettuce comprise 96% water. Tomatoes, zucchini, radishes and celery are 95% water. Eggplant, cabbage, cauliflower, sweet peppers, spinach and strawberries are 92% water. Grapefruit and broccoli are 91% water.

Because of the high water content of such fruits and vegetables, they are said to be good conductors of electricity. I find this information of little use, unless one wishes to wire a house with cucumbers and zucchini.

So, when it is all said and done, the best and most convenient water source probably is the usual suspect--the faucet.