Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Study shows 'a growing plastic smog' in the ocean of 171 trillion particles

News Feed
Thursday, March 9, 2023

A new study reports there is as "growing plastic smog" of more than 170 trillion particles floating in the world's oceans. The research article, published in the journal Plos One on Wednesday, found there has been a "rapid increase" of plastic particles in the world's oceans since 2005. Researchers used surface water data from 11,777 stations from 1979 to 2019 to estimate the number of plastic particles in the water over time to determine whether current anti-pollution polices are effective. The researchers estimated that there were about 1.1 to 4.9 million tons of plastic particles floating in the ocean in 2019. The study suggested that increased production of plastic and waste, couple with low rates of recycling, may have contributed to the "dramatic increase." "As global awareness, science, and policy interventions for plastic escalate, institutions around the world are seeking preventative strategies," the study reads. "Central to this is the need for precise global time series of plastic pollution with which we can assess whether implemented policies are effective, but at present we lack these data." Researchers included a historical overview of global policy measure that were aimed to reduce plastic pollution in the ocean. Based on their analysis, the researchers are calling for "urgent and effective solutions" to combat ocean pollution. Without intervention, the researchers warned that the amount of plastic particles could increase by around 2.6 times by 2040. "Environmental recovery of plastic has limited merit, so solution strategies must address those systems that restrict emissions of plastic pollution in the first place," the study states. "Therefore, establishing standardized monitoring frameworks to track global trends and creating binding and enforceable international agreements to prevent the emissions of plastic pollution are the best long-term global solutions."

A new study reports there is as "growing plastic smog" of more than 170 trillion particles floating in the world's oceans. The research article, published in the journal Plos One on Wednesday, found there has been a "rapid increase" of plastic particles in the world's oceans since 2005. Researchers used surface water data from 11,777 stations...

A new study reports there is as "growing plastic smog" of more than 170 trillion particles floating in the world's oceans.

The research article, published in the journal Plos One on Wednesday, found there has been a "rapid increase" of plastic particles in the world's oceans since 2005. Researchers used surface water data from 11,777 stations from 1979 to 2019 to estimate the number of plastic particles in the water over time to determine whether current anti-pollution polices are effective.

The researchers estimated that there were about 1.1 to 4.9 million tons of plastic particles floating in the ocean in 2019. The study suggested that increased production of plastic and waste, couple with low rates of recycling, may have contributed to the "dramatic increase."

"As global awareness, science, and policy interventions for plastic escalate, institutions around the world are seeking preventative strategies," the study reads. "Central to this is the need for precise global time series of plastic pollution with which we can assess whether implemented policies are effective, but at present we lack these data."

Researchers included a historical overview of global policy measure that were aimed to reduce plastic pollution in the ocean. Based on their analysis, the researchers are calling for "urgent and effective solutions" to combat ocean pollution.

Without intervention, the researchers warned that the amount of plastic particles could increase by around 2.6 times by 2040.

"Environmental recovery of plastic has limited merit, so solution strategies must address those systems that restrict emissions of plastic pollution in the first place," the study states. "Therefore, establishing standardized monitoring frameworks to track global trends and creating binding and enforceable international agreements to prevent the emissions of plastic pollution are the best long-term global solutions."

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

New Calculations Uncover a Vast Ocean Beneath Pluto’s Ice

Graduate student Alex Nguyen calculated the depth and density of the solar system’s most mysterious and remote body of water. New calculations by Alex Nguyen,...

Recent research has provided deeper insights into the subsurface ocean of Pluto, previously believed to be an impossibility due to the dwarf planet’s extremely low temperatures.Graduate student Alex Nguyen calculated the depth and density of the solar system’s most mysterious and remote body of water.New calculations by Alex Nguyen, a graduate student in the Department of Earth, Environmental, and Planetary Sciences, are bringing into focus the existence of a vast ocean of liquid water beneath Pluto’s icy surface.In a paper published in the journal Icarus, Nguyen used mathematical models and images from the New Horizons spacecraft that passed by Pluto in 2015 to take a closer look at the ocean that likely covers the planet beneath a thick shell of nitrogen, methane, and water ice. Patrick McGovern of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston, Texas, was a co-author of the paper.For many decades, planetary scientists assumed that Pluto could not support an ocean. The surface temperature is about -220 C, a temperature so cold even gases like nitrogen and methane freeze solid. Water shouldn’t have a chance. “Pluto is a small body,” Nguyen said. “It should have lost almost all of its heat shortly after it was formed, so basic calculations would suggest that it’s frozen solid to its core.”Recent Evidence of Liquid WaterBut in recent years, prominent scientists including Professor Bill McKinnon have gathered evidence suggesting Pluto likely contains an ocean of liquid water beneath the ice. That inference came from several lines of evidence, including Pluto’s cryovolcanoes that spew ice and water vapor. Although there is still some debate, “it’s now generally accepted that Pluto has an ocean,” Nguyen said.The new study probes the ocean in greater detail, even if it’s far too deep below the ice for scientists to ever see. Nguyen and McGovern created mathematical models to explain the cracks and bulges in the ice covering Pluto’s Sputnik Platina Basin, the site of a meteor collision billions of years ago. Their calculations suggest the ocean in this area exists beneath a shell of water ice 40 to 80 km thick, a blanket of protection that likely keeps the inner ocean from freezing solid.They also calculated the likely density or salinity of the ocean based on the fractures in the ice above. They estimate Pluto’s ocean is at most about 8% denser than seawater on Earth, or roughly the same as Utah’s Great Salt Lake. If you could somehow get to Pluto’s ocean, you could effortlessly float.As Nguyen explained, that level of density would explain the abundance of fractures seen on the surface. If the ocean was significantly less dense, the ice shell would collapse, creating many more fractures than actually observed. If the ocean was much denser, there would be fewer fractures. “We estimated a sort of Goldilocks zone where the density and shell thickness is just right,” he said.Space agencies have no plans to return to Pluto any time soon, so many of its mysteries will remain for future generations of researchers. Whether it’s called a planet, a planetoid, or merely one of many objects in the outer reaches of the solar system, it’s worth studying, Nguyen said. “From my perspective, it’s a planet.”Reference: “The role of Pluto’s ocean’s salinity in supporting nitrogen ice loads within the Sputnik Planitia basin” by P.J. McGovern and A.L. Nguyen, 28 January 2024, Icarus.DOI: 10.1016/j.icarus.2024.115968

They Got a Mysterious $24,000 Water Bill. Then the Shut-Off Notice Came.

A federal lawsuit accuses New York City of defying state and city regulations meant to protect vulnerable homeowners from losing water service.

In March, as Mayor Eric Adams began an aggressive crackdown on New York City landlords who were behind on water bill payments, a public school safety agent and her family were presented with a brand-new $24,000 water bill.If they did not pay at least $6,000 immediately, the city said, it would shut off the water to the home the woman shared with her husband, a diabetic car-service driver, and their 9- and 15-year-old children.The mayor’s crackdown — announced in front of a boutique Manhattan hotel that was in arrears — suggested he was targeting large landlords, as a way to drum up payments to help preserve the vast water system on which all New Yorkers rely.But the city may also be targeting homeowners who are aging, taking care of young children or suffering from serious medical problems, in defiance of state and city regulations that aim to protect vulnerable New Yorkers, according to a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Federal District Court in Brooklyn.The crackdown by the city’s Department of Environmental Protection comes as it is struggling to fund its vast portfolio, a task made more difficult by the mayor’s diversion of more than $1.4 billion from the department to other city needs.But the environmental agency’s demands are pressing: It must maintain the water and sewer systems, while also making the city less susceptible to flash flooding, a phenomenon that is growing more common with climate change. In 2021, flash flooding associated with Hurricane Ida drowned 11 New Yorkers in basements.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

California environmentalists sue Port of Los Angeles, alleging clean water violations

A California environmental group on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit against the Port of Los Angeles, accusing the defendant of unleashing toxic pollutants into the San Pedro Bay. The activists — from the organization Environment California — claimed that the port has violated the federal Clean Water Act with more than 2,000 illegal discharges in the past...

A California environmental group on Tuesday filed a federal lawsuit against the Port of Los Angeles, accusing the defendant of unleashing toxic pollutants into the San Pedro Bay. The activists — from the organization Environment California — claimed that the port has violated the federal Clean Water Act with more than 2,000 illegal discharges in the past five years alone. Those releases, they argued, have routinely surpassed legal limits on fecal bacteria, copper and other contaminants. In addition to spotlighting the alleged pollution itself, the plaintiffs also claimed that the Port's stormwater treatment system is problematically undersized. As a result, the activists contended, some untreated wastewater ends up bypassing the system entirely, also in violation of federal law. “Everyone in and around the Los Angeles Harbor knows that the water quality is terrible," Laura Deehan, state director of Environment California, said in a statement. "We are suing to get the Port’s pollution of San Pedro Bay under control and make it a model for improving water quality,” she added. Deehan and her colleagues argued that because the Port earns revenue from leasing and services fees charged to massive shipping corporations, the City of Los Angeles should not be supporting this entity via tax dollars. Currently, the Port is housed within the Los Angeles Harbor Department, a branch of the city's municipal government, and is located about 25 miles south of downtown.  Last month, the Port authorized a $2.6 billion budget for the 2024-2025 fiscal year and forecast about $281 million in net revenues, the plaintiffs stressed. “If a well-funded city department pollutes in violation of its Clean Water Act permit limits, how can the city expect anyone else to comply?” Deehan asked. While the port's on-site treatment system is supposed to remove toxic metals, bacteria and other pollutants that amass on the property, the activists argued that the equipment has proved ineffective. Unable to wholly eliminate those contaminants during dry weather, the system leaves behind excess pollutants — which then pollute the stormwater when it rains, according to the activists. The pump station at the Port, per the complaint, spills out into a section of the Los Angeles Harbor that is "heavily used for public recreation" — attracting more than a million people every day.  "People swim, fish, and boat in the Harbor, and picnic, barbecue, use playgrounds, and engage in other activities along its shore," the plaintiffs argued. Even though the Port has been regularly paying a "mandatory minimum" state fine of $3,000 per violation, these infractions have persisted, the plaintiffs noted. Deehan described these payments as "a slap-on-the-wrist-penalty," arguing that the alleged violator is paying to pollute. Under the Clean Water Act's "citizen suit" provision, those affected by such violations can bring a case to federal court after providing 60 days' warning to the defendant and to state and federal environmental agencies. Environment California said it sent notice of its intent to file such a suit on May 21. "The Port can afford to solve this problem — and the people of California cannot afford for unchecked pollution like this to continue," Deehan said. The Hill has reached out to the Port of Los Angeles for comment.

Warming waters are ‘scrambling ocean life’ on all sides of the United States

What's under the surface has always been a little mysterious. But that's never been more true, as rising temps shuffle species on all sides of the country.

Off the coast of Oregon, hidden just beneath the surface, once-towering seaweed forests are beginning to resemble clear-cut wastelands.Bull kelp, a giant species of seaweed that can grow 100 feet tall underwater and is known as the “sequoias of the sea,” is dying at a record pace, and so far, it’s not coming back. The kelp forests that formed the backbone of Oregon’s offshore ecosystems, affecting everything from snails to whales, have declined by two thirds since 2010.“It got so bad, we stopped doing kayak fishing tours,” said Dave Lacey, a boat captain in Port Orford. “We used to pull in about $10,000 every summer. Now that’s totally gone. We just gave up on it. I didn’t want to take people’s money and not catch any fish.”From the Atlantic to the Pacific, from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, rising water temperatures and more frequent heat waves are changing what’s found under the surface, as mass migrations of whole species transform generational fishing business, offshore recreation and even what’s on the menu at local restaurants.Ethan Hamel (left) and Earl Long (right) work to load whitefish into the sorting bin on Saginaw Bay, MI on Tuesday June 11, 2024. (Santino Mattioli | MLive)In 2024, Advance Local Media newsrooms in Alabama, New Jersey, Michigan and Oregon set out to document the changes. Some of what fishermen are reporting is sudden, the effects decisive and clear, while other changes are more subtle and still emerging.Scientists are just beginning to document the changing patterns, as they tease apart how warming waters affect ecosystems influenced by many variables. For now, scientists are sure things are getting hotter, and the fishermen are sure marine species are on the move. And no one can say for certain what comes next.“One of the things that keeps me up at night is … in addition to all the changes we’re seeing, we know there are going to be big surprises,” said Malin Pinsky, a professor in the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources at Rutgers University.“And those are going to likely disrupt our economies, likely disrupt the ecosystem — the ocean ecosystems — that we rely on,” he told NJ.com.(Andre Malok | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com)Off the Atlantic coast, the lucrative black sea bass are heading farther and farther north as water temperatures increase. That’s a boon for New Jersey, where fishing operations are expanding, but not so much for North Carolina, where sea bass numbers are plummeting.The change is so rapid that the government can’t keep up. Even in places where black sea bass are thriving, outdated limits mean they can’t be caught.“This commercial quota has needed, and can easily sustain, an increase,” Patrick Knapp, a Rhode Island fisherman, wrote to regulators. “The science is there and so are the fish.”In the Gulf of Mexico, tropical fish like snook are making their way north, where sportfish competitions off Alabama have added categories for colorful species that are normally found in the Florida Keys. While amateurs welcome the tropical catch, warming temperatures are disrupting the patterns of popular fishing targets, as oysters and corals struggle to hold on in their historic ranges.“We’ve always had that cobia run in March and April and we would see them migrate in,” said Frank Harwell, a long-time fishing boat captain who’s fished coastal Alabama most of his life. “We don’t see that at all anymore.”Even the Great Lakes are affected, as there isn’t as much ice cover as there used to be. That means the whitefish hatch earlier, making them more vulnerable to predators. At the same time, invasive mussels are gobbling up their food, throwing a historic fishery into turmoil.“If there is enough ice cover over them and they do hatch, they’re having a hard time finding food up until about age 2,” said Lakon Williams of Bay Port Fish Company, which still operates two fishing boats on Lake Huron.In Oregon, the loss of the kelp forests is leading to changes big and small, from a drop in the commercial red sea urchin harvest to a decline in recreational fishing near the shore to the complete disappearance of red abalone snails. It’s like a forest with no trees, and nowhere for the snails and fish to live, said Sarah Gravem, a marine ecologist at Oregon State University.“We went snorkeling one day and there was zero kelp, except for this one old kelp from the year before that had made it through,” Gravem told The Oregonian/OregonLive. “I dove down to the bottom on this scraggly looking, ugly kelp and on the kelp’s holdfast there was a single abalone licking the stem. And about 17 urchins were on its back and coming up behind it and this abalone was just trying to shake them off. It was the most heartbreaking moment.”In Hot WaterThe last 10 yearsBy most measures, 2023 broke records. Analysis done by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration showed 2023 was the hottest year on record in North America, South America and Africa. It was the second warmest year ever in Europe and Asia.The global surface temperature rose higher above its historical average than ever before last year. And many areas are continuing to break heat records in 2024.While the change in temperature is evident and easily documented, the impacts are harder to suss out.Recording ecosystem-wide changes is a difficult and slow process that often takes years before trends clearly emerge, Dana Infante, chair of Michigan State University’s Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, told MLive.com.“This isn’t an overnight thing because we also know there are natural fluctuations, right? We want to be sure that the changes that are being detected are real,” Infante said.“The warming has been the most dramatic in the last 10 years. We’re just on the cusp of researchers really starting to get some literature out that documents changes.”For many of these changes, there are more factors than just temperature to blame. Invasive species are taking a toll in Michigan. Plastic pollution is affecting marine life off New Jersey. Changes in freshwater flow can be devastating to Gulf oysters. Hordes of purple urchins, emboldened by the disappearance of their predator, are devouring kelp in Oregon.But warming waters seem to be a common culprit.“Climate change is scrambling ocean life in many ways right now, including warming waters, loss of oxygen, and more acidification than we’ve seen historically,” said Pinsky, the Rutgers professor. “It’s pushing fish and other marine life to new locations and driving them to disappear from places that we’ve relied on them (to be) for decades and centuries.“All of this then affects our fisheries and affects our coastal economies and eventually affects the food that ends up on our dinner plates and ends up in the global supply chain.”Captain Art Unkefer from the fishing boat Rufus II watches ice being poured on black sea bass on a dock in Sea Isle City on Saturday, May 25, 2024. (Jim Lowney | For NJ Advance Media)Dinner plates have already been impacted.The Atlantic northern shrimp population in the Gulf of Maine collapsed after a record-setting marine heat wave in 2012. Research has shown that warmer temperatures hurt the shrimp’s ability to reproduce, and made the waters more palatable for the longfin squid, a voracious predator that took a toll on the northern shrimp.“My first reaction when I saw the 2012 survey data was shock, perhaps even horror, and disbelief,” said Anne Richards, a retired biologist formerly with the Northeast Fisheries Science Center’s laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass.“Though recruitment had been down in the previous years, we would not have expected to see the bottom fall out of the adult population like that. It was unprecedented,” she told NJ.com.Since 2013, the fishery is still closed and has not recovered, and its future is very much in doubt.“Not all species react the same way to climate change,” Richards said. “So there will be new suites of species coexisting that hadn’t really interacted before, with perhaps unpredictable results.”In Alabama’s Gulf Coast, researchers found a direct link between oyster harvests and marine heat waves — consecutive days where the temperature far exceeds the average for that date.Fresh from Alabama coastal waters, wild oysters sit on a dock after being brought in on Feb. 11, 2020, the last day of Alabama's 2019-20 oyster season.  (Lawrence Specker | LSpecker@AL.com)Oyster reproduction plummeted in years that included long-lasting marine heat waves, according to research by Sean Powers, chair of the University of South Alabama’s Stokes School of Marine and Environmental Sciences and other researchers.“It is a real problem with oysters that we’re experiencing such high extreme temperatures, and that’s going to make the environment much less hospitable for the oysters,” Powers told AL.com.Bottom-dwelling Atlantic surf clams have also suffered from warmers waters off New Jersey’s coast in recent years.In the Florida Keys, there has been a lot of attention on coral reefs, bleached by the heat.Mandy Karnauskas, Research Fishery Biologist and Ecosystem Science Lead for NOAA’s Southeast Fisheries Science Center in Miami, said that 2023 was an especially bad year for corals in the Florida Keys.“We have really clear evidence on how that heat stress and these heat waves impact our corals, and last year, we actually had a really bad year,” Karnauskas said. “In 2023 the ocean was really hot. I know we had some buoys out in the coastal areas, but well offshore where the temperature was actually over 100 degrees Fahrenheit.”According to NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch program, some coral types such as elkhorn corals are particularly vulnerable. NOAA noted that of 160 elkhorn coral genotypes documented in the Florida Keys, only 37 remained in fall of 2023.“Climate change is scrambling ocean life in many ways right now, including warming waters, loss of oxygen, and more acidification than we’ve seen historically.”Malin Pinsky, professor in the Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources at Rutgers UniversityIn April 2024, NOAA warned the planet was experiencing a global coral bleaching event, the fourth documented in the past decade.Coral bleaching is when a normally vibrant, colorful coral turns white due to stress. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the coral is dead — they can recover if conditions improve — but it means the coral is in dire straits.Off the coast of Oregon, the bull kelp acts much like a coral reef, creating a refuge that sustains a chain of wildlife. Now researchers and nonprofit groups are beginning to try to restore that ecosystem by regrowing kelp forests that are disappearing fast.Members of the Oregon Kelp Alliance enter the Pacific Ocean on May 24, 2024 to snorkel and dive in one of Oregon’s last remaining kelp forests, at Cape Arago State Park near Coos Bay. (Gosia Wozniacka / The Oregonian)Part of the problem for the kelp was the disappearance of the sunflower sea star, which turned out to be a key cog in the ecosystem. The sea stars eat purple sea urchins, a round, spiky invertebrate that eats kelp like a teenager eats french fries.“I don’t think the outbreak was triggered by global warming. But the warmness made everything worse,” said Gravem, the marine ecologist at Oregon State. “It’s clear the stars died a lot faster in warmer waters than in colder.”When the sea stars suffered huge losses beginning in 2013, the urchin populations exploded, with the hungry echinoderms devouring the underwater forests. Now, efforts are underway to replant the kelp and breed and reintroduce the sea stars to rescue Oregon’s iconic marine ecosystem. But it’s a tall order.Aaron Galloway, a marine ecologist at the University of Oregon who regularly dives off the Pacific coast for his research on the sea stars, said he’s not sure what comes next for the great kelp forests.A bull kelp’s air-filled bladder floats up to the surface off the Oregon coast, its fronds or blades providing a perfect hiding place for tiny baby fish. (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Marine Reserves Program)“I’m somewhat optimistic that there’s going to be some recoveries, but it’s also a time of great sadness,” he told The Oregonian/OregonLive.“I mean, there’s so much change happening in the ocean. I’m not sure what’s going to be here in the future.”

How to best filter your L.A. tap water based on your ZIP Code

We spoke to experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your drinking water.

Nearly a year ago, I scribbled “Replace Brita filter” on my to-do list. But the errand perpetually fell by the wayside. There were so many more pressing tasks to complete. “Oh, it’s fine,” I thought. “How bad can it be?” Let’s just say that a day into reporting this story, I ran out to the market and bought a three-pack.We reach for our water taps more than almost any other object in our homes — to brush our teeth, wash our faces, make coffee or tea in the morning. To cook meals, rinse dishes and wipe countertops. To water the plants, do laundry and fill our pets’ bowls. To shower and shave. And most often for a drink. In L.A., water rules everything around us. Drink up, cool off and dive into our stories about hydrating and recreating in the city. But how much do you really know about what’s in your tap water? And if you filter it, are you using the right technology? Many of us may not be fully aware of where our water even comes from. That’s because the water that flows into our homes in the L.A. area can be surprisingly different, ZIP Code to ZIP Code. The level of arsenic found in Compton’s tap water may differ wildly from that found in Glendale. Malibu’s tap water may have more hexavalent chromium while Pasadena’s doesn’t have any. One tap does not fit all. “Where you are, the location, it really makes a difference in your water quality,” said Tasha Stoiber, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit research and advocacy group focusing on environmental health. We went to the source, so to speak — experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration — to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your H20. L.A.’s water sources | Federal and state protections | Determining your water quality | How to test | How to filter | The bare minimumL.A.’s water sources Like most major cities, the Greater Los Angeles area is served by a dizzying number of community water systems. In California, there are 2,913 of them to serve about 39.025 million people — and those are just the larger ones that operate year-round, according to the EWG’s Tap Water Database. Each utility company treats the water in its assigned municipality differently before it flows through consumers’ faucets. That’s because each draws from different water sources. One area’s tap may be coming from rivers and lakes (otherwise categorized as “surface water”) while another’s could be pumped from wells from beneath layers of rock and sediment (categorized as “groundwater”). Depending on where the water travels, it may pick up different undesirable contaminants. Surface water, for example, could have runoff that includes nitrate used to fertilize land in agricultural areas. Groundwater could have naturally occurring chemical elements, such as arsenic, that come from bedrock. More often than not, L.A. area tap water comes from a mix of these sources. Our utility companies draw from different aqueducts, those large, often concrete ditches or canals that extend from the source to the water treatment plant. From there it flows through pipes, underground, to your home.In 2023, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — which serves about 4 million people throughout the city of Los Angeles — sourced its tap water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as from local groundwater, according to its most recent drinking water quality report.The specific geographic location of a water source also determines what ends up in your tap water. A lake near a highly industrial area risks containing more pollutants than water coming from a lake in the High Sierras.Another reason the water might be different between ZIP Codes: Utility companies have different resources at their disposal.“The size of the drinking water system can be an indicator of the drinking water quality,” Stoiber said. “It’s based on economy of scale. The larger ones have more resources for treatment. Smaller systems can be at a bit more of an economic disadvantage.”Federal and state water protections There are federal regulations that require utility companies to stay below maximum contaminant levels for more than 90 pollutants in drinking water. They’re also required to publish an annual consumer confidence report with information about contaminant levels and water sources. “But many of our drinking water regulations were set in the ’70s and ’80 and are not as protective as they should be,” Stoiber said. “There are contaminants in your drinking water that don’t have regulations around them.” How harmful these contaminants are, and how much you’d have to ingest over time to affect your health, is contested. But in general, however many pollutants you might find in L.A.’s tap water, there are not enough to make you seriously ill in one gulp. Some good news: In April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized new regulations around a family of about 15,000 chemicals known as PFAS. They’re often referred to as the “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the environment. California also voted in April to finalize a limit for hexavalent chromium, or “Chrome 6,” which many people know as the carcinogenic chemical that the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. contaminated residents’ groundwater with, from 1952 to 1966, in Hinkley, Calif. — the legal upshot of which was depicted in the film “Erin Brockovich.” But those changes won’t be immediate. “Upgrading water treatment plants is expensive and takes years,” said USC’s Daniel McCurry, who researches water supply and treatment. “Most smaller utilities, especially, just won’t have the money to make the upgrades in the initial time frame.” 2027, McCurry notes, is the deadline for utilities to complete their “initial monitoring” before the new regulations for PFAS go into effect in 2029. (Henry Hargreaves / For The Times) How to determine your water quality So where to start? It’s easier than it might seem. First, search for your consumer confidence report on your utility company’s website. You can then cross-reference that information with EWG’s free Tap Water Database, which allows you to type in your ZIP Code (look for the prompt “Is your water safe?”). It then will populate your water utility company and the number of people it serves. From there, you can click on “View Utility” to produce an easy-to-decipher report listing the source of your water and contaminants detected in it. When I typed my own Silver Lake ZIP Code in for a water quality analysis, the results did not put me at ease. It listed nine contaminants detected in my water, among them bromate and uranium. Some of these were found at levels that far exceeded the standards of the EWG but were still below the legal limit. I called the LADWP to make sense of what I’ve found. “There’s no health concern,” LADWP’s director of water quality, Jonathan Leung, said of my findings, stressing that the contaminants were far below the federally mandated legal limit. “That’s where, collectively, all the toxicologists and water quality specialists and scientists have worked together to set national standards. As a water quality utility, that’s what we set our sights on. The public should take confidence that the legal limits are protective of public health — and we strive to do better than that.” McCurry added that the EWG and EPA have different standards for the amount of contaminants found in water. “When the EPA sets a water contaminant limit, it’s a balance between protecting public health while staying realistic about the treatment technology we have and how much it costs,” McCurry said. “Everyone’s perception or tolerance of risk is different, but for me, personally, I drink water straight from the tap and don’t worry about it. It’s very unlikely you’ll get sick from tap water, assuming the tap water meets federal regulations.” How to test your water at home Whatever your personal tolerance level, you can improve both the quality and taste of your tap water by choosing the right filter, experts say. But, given the array of filtration products and techniques on the market, that’s easier said than done. Choosing from options like “ion-exchange demineralization,” “ultraviolet sterilization” and “chemical feed pumps” can be intimidating.Take a breath. Then step back. Filtering should be a tailored approach, said Brian Campbell, founder of Water Filter Guru, which lab-tests and reports on residential water treatment methods and products. “There’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all water treatment solution,” Campbell said.He added that even after reading utility consumer reports and nonprofit chemical analyses, you still may need to know more.“[Those reports] will give you a general sense but not the whole picture, Campbell said. “Because water can be recontaminated after it leaves the treatment plant — like if your home has old plumbing with lead piping. But it’s a start.”You can test your home’s water quality yourself using fairly affordable water test strips, available for about $15 in stores such as Home Depot. These, Campbell said, will “give you an indication of a handful of the most common 12 to 15 contaminants like lead, arsenic, chromium, nitrate possibly.” However it will only give you a range of those aforementioned contaminants, not the exact concentration in your water. If you want specific information about the chemical levels, you can run a more in-depth test. The best way to do that, Campbell said, is through a certified lab, where the cost ranges from roughly $100 to more than $1,000 depending on how comprehensive you want to get. How to choose a filter Once you know what’s in your water, you’ll be able to choose the right filter technology to treat it, Campbell said. Here’s what he suggests using for some of the most common issues.PFAS. This is the family of about 15,000 chemicals used for their water repellent and oil repellent properties, such as in nonstick pans or fast food packaging. “The most studied filtration method for this is activated carbon adsorption,” Campbell said. “It’s the most common technology used in pitcher filtration. Even the most simple water pitcher filters should theoretically reduce PFAS.” Reverse osmosis filtration systems also will address PFAS — it’s one of the most thorough techniques and includes activated carbon as one of its stages. Historically, these pricy systems were installed directly into sink pipes, but countertop versions now are available for renters. Microplastics. “They get into the environment and break down into smaller and smaller pieces — so small you’d need a microscope to see them,” Campbell said. The best technique to address those — because they are suspended particles, floating in the water and not dissolved — is mechanical filtration, he said. The technology removes suspended particles, like pipe rust or sand and grit coming from a hot water heater. Reverse osmosis also would work. Distillation would be effective as well and is, per Campbell, one of the best to get rid of nearly all common contaminants. But, Campbell warned, “It requires a massive amount of energy and time to treat and distill a relatively small volume of water — so not the most practical.” Disinfection byproducts. This is a group of chemicals created when common water disinfectants — typically chlorine — interact with organic matter (such as dirt or rust) that’s already present in the pipes that run from the distribution plant to your home or office, Campbell said. “Activated carbon adsorption is the best way to deal with this. Reverse osmosis will also deal with them because a component of that [technique] is activated carbon.”Pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer. “This is more of an issue in agricultural areas,” Campbell said. Typically, he added, they can be treated using activated carbon and reverse osmosis.Fluoride. Tap water is fluoridated in many areas because of its dental health benefits. But recent research suggests that prenatal exposure to fluoride may be linked to increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in children at age 3. “Reverse osmosis would be the best treatment for this, but there are a few adsorption media that can reduce fluoride, like a filter using bone char carbon (activated carbon that comes from animal bones) or a filter using activated alumina media, another adsorption media,” said Campbell.Heavy metals. Lead is obviously the most infamous heavy metal water contaminant, but consumers also should watch out for arsenic (primarily from groundwater) and chromium 6 (which comes from industrial manufacturing). “Typically, for metals, reverse osmosis is the best option,” said Campbell. “Activated carbon works for chromium 6 but not for arsenic. Distillation, again, gets rid of everything but it’s not practical.”Hard water. Hard water is caused by mineral buildup, which isn’t bad for your health but can create limescale on appliances like your water heater. It also can affect your beauty routine. “Soap doesn’t lather as well with hard water,” said Campbell. “Your hair might feel brittle and it can irritate skin issues like eczema.” He recommends treating the issue at the water point of entry to the home with cation exchange resin, a type of ion exchange. The best way to know if a product is actually capable of doing what it claims to do, Campbell said, is to look up its performance certifications. “You can do that in databases through the Water Quality Assn., the National Sanitation Foundation and the International Assn. of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials.”The bare minimum If nothing else, Stoiber urged consumers to peruse the EWG’s guide to countertop filters — and to purchase one. Though McCurry is content drinking from the tap, he agreed it couldn’t hurt. “If you have reason to believe there are, say, PFAS above the future regulation target, then yeah, get a Brita filter,” he said.Needless to say, that task is no longer on my to-do list.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.