How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page
Lake County News,California
  • Home
    • Registration Form
  • News
    • Education
    • Veterans
    • Community
      • Obituaries
      • Letters
      • Commentary
    • Police Logs
    • Business
    • Recreation
    • Health
    • Religion
    • Legals
    • Arts & Life
    • Regional
  • Calendar
  • Contact us
    • FAQs
    • Phones, E-Mail
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise Here
  • Login
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page

News

Wild turkey numbers are falling in some parts of the US – the main reason may be habitat loss

Details
Written by: Marcus Lashley, University of Florida and William Gulsby, Auburn University
Published: 23 April 2024

 

Wild turkeys in a yard on Staten Island, N.Y. AP Photo/Kathy Willens

Birdsong is a welcome sign of spring, but robins and cardinals aren’t the only birds showing off for breeding season. In many parts of North America, you’re likely to encounter male wild turkeys, puffed up like beach balls and with their tails fanned out, aggressively strutting through woods and parks or stopping traffic on your street.

Wild turkeys were abundant across North America when European settlers arrived. But people killed them indiscriminately year-round – sometimes for their meat and feathers, but settlers also took turkey eggs from nests and poisoned adult turkeys to keep them from damaging crops. Thanks to this unregulated killing and habitat loss, by 1900 wild turkeys had disappeared from much of their historical range.

 

Turkey populations gradually recovered over the 20th century, aided by regulation, conservation funding and state restoration programs. By the early 2000s, they could be found in Mexico, Canada and every U.S. state except Alaska.

Now, however, the trend appears to be reversing in some areas. In a 2021 study, eight out of 30 states surveyed reported that turkey populations declined from 2014 to 2019, with some of the sharpest decreases in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana and Oklahoma.

Turkey numbers increased in 14 states, mainly in the Northeast and mid-Atlantic. But even in many of those states, populations were down from historic peaks in the early 2000s. Another study in 2023 reported that turkey populations in the eastern half of the U.S. were declining by about 9% yearly, based on data from the past 50 years.

We are wildlife ecologists working to determine why turkey populations are shrinking in portions of their range. This is a classic challenge in ecology: Many factors could be at play, and it takes careful analysis to untangle them and figure out whether each trend is a cause or symptom – or just irrelevant.

We created the Wild Turkey Science podcast to make peer-reviewed science accessible to the public and provide a platform for turkey researchers and biologists to discuss their work. So far, we have reviewed numerous studies and interviewed scientists from more than a dozen states. Here are some hypotheses that have emerged:

Fewer open spaces

While turkeys may appear at home in urban areas, their habitat is open forest – areas with sparse trees that allow near-full sunlight to reach herbaceous plants at ground level. Most uplands, or elevated areas, in the eastern U.S. historically were this type of dry-adapted woodland, savanna and grassland complex.

In 1792, naturalist William Bartram described the eastern U.S. as “Grande Savane,” or big savanna, a landscape with abundant wild turkeys. Traveling in Florida, Bartram wrote:

“I was awakened, in the morning early, by the cheering converse of the wild turkey cocks saluting each other from the sun-brightened tops of the lofty cypress and magnolia. They begin at early dawn, and continue till sunrise. The high forests ring with the noise of these social sentinels, the watchword being caught and repeated, from one to another, for hundreds of miles around, insomuch that the whole country is, for an hour or more, in an universal shout.”

Today, very little woodland or savanna remains in the U.S. Most of it has been cleared for development, farming or livestock grazing. The open spaces that are left often are not suitable for wild turkeys: They need a well-developed layer of vegetation at ground level that includes mainly wild flowers, native grasses and young shrubs and trees to provide cover for nesting and raising their young.

 

Very few of the remaining lands suitable for wild turkeys are managed using frequent, low-intensity prescribed fire, which creates and maintains a mosaic of open forest and grassland by continually setting back growth of trees, shrubs and vines. Suppressing fire in these forests across the eastern U.S. allows them to change from open forest dominated by fire-adapted grasses and wildflowers to closed forests with dense canopies, creating shady, moist conditions with minimal vegetation near ground level.

Turkeys can persist in these denser, shaded forests, but they don’t reproduce as successfully, and fewer of their young survive. The lack of ground vegetation makes it hard for hens to hide their nests, and it limits food supplies for young turkey poults.

This isn’t just a problem for wild turkeys. Over the past 50 years, populations of bird species that live in open forests and grasslands have fallen by more than 50%. Grasslands and savannas support hundreds of other wild species as well, many of which are declining.

The roles of food, predators and hunting

Scientists have proposed other explanations for turkey declines, but many of these hypotheses are at least partly habitat issues.

For example, blame is often placed on more abundant predators that eat turkey eggs, such as raccoons and opossums. But these predators probably are more abundant in part due to changes in turkey habitat.

For example, a 2024 study found that a range of mammals that eat turkey eggs were observed 70% of the time when prescribed burning was not used, but were observed less than 10% of the time in open forests where planned burns were conducted biannually. This suggests that prescribed fire across the wild turkey’s range creates an environment that’s more favorable for turkeys than for their predators.

Some observers have suggested that turkeys may be so abundant that the landscape can’t support their current population, so now they are declining to a more sustainable level. If turkey habitat remained stable, we would expect to see their numbers go up and down naturally, but their average abundance over time would remain the same. Instead, turkey numbers appear to be slowly but steadily falling in many areas – perhaps signaling that habitat availability is declining along with turkey populations.

What about food supplies? Young turkeys feed on insects, so insect declines may explain some observed changes in turkey populations. According to one calculation, land-dwelling bird species that depend on insects as food have declined by 2.9 billion individuals over the past 50 years, while those species that don’t have gained by 26.2 million individuals.

Insect losses could explain why fewer turkeys are surviving to adulthood, but insects depend on plants, so this shift is likely also linked to habitat changes. And where land is managed to promote native flowers and grasses, there also are abundant pollinators, ants, grasshoppers and spiders that turkeys relish.

Insect declines could explain some of the wild turkey declines.

Lastly, some observers have proposed that the timing of hunting could be affecting turkey reproduction. However, a recent study in Tennessee found that this was not the case. Another recent study showed that hunters in the Southeast were harvesting about the same share of male turkeys as when turkey populations were growing rapidly. If current turkey harvest rates are unsustainable, the explanation is likely that wild turkey productivity has declined for other reasons, such as habitat.

Creating space for turkeys

Land owners can help by managing for native grasses and wildflowers on their property, which will provide breeding habitat for turkeys. We have produced podcast episodes that discuss which plants are valuable to turkeys and other wildlife, and how to promote and maintain plants that are turkey-friendly.

People who don’t own land can support state and local efforts to restore wildlife, contribute to local wildlife conservation groups and buy hunting licenses, which help to fund wildlife management programs. With the right conditions, this iconic North American species could thrive yet again.The Conversation

Marcus Lashley, Associate Professor of Wildlife Ecology, University of Florida and William Gulsby, Associate Professor of Wildlife Management, Auburn University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Supervisors to consider appeal of cannabis project next to Kelsey Creek Schoolhouse

Details
Written by: Elizabeth Larson
Published: 22 April 2024
LAKE COUNTY, Calif. — The Board of Supervisors this week will be asked to consider overturning the Lake County Planning Commission’s decision to deny a major cannabis grow next to a historic site.

The‌ ‌board will meet beginning ‌at‌ ‌9‌ ‌a.m. Tuesday, April 23, in the board chambers on the first floor of the Lake County Courthouse, 255 N. Forbes St., Lakeport.

The‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌can‌ ‌be‌ ‌watched‌ ‌live‌ ‌on‌ ‌Channel‌ ‌8, ‌online‌ ‌at‌ ‌https://countyoflake.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx‌‌ and‌ ‌on‌ ‌the‌ ‌county’s‌ ‌Facebook‌ ‌page. Accompanying‌ ‌board‌ ‌documents, ‌the‌ ‌agenda‌ ‌and‌ ‌archived‌ ‌board‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌videos‌ ‌also‌ ‌are‌ ‌available‌ ‌at‌ ‌that‌ ‌link. ‌ ‌

To‌ ‌participate‌ ‌in‌ ‌real-time, ‌join‌ ‌the‌ ‌Zoom‌ ‌meeting‌ ‌by‌ ‌clicking‌ ‌this‌ ‌link‌. ‌ ‌

The‌ agenda gave this week’s ‌meeting‌ ‌ID‌ ‌is‌ 865 3354 4962, ‌pass code 726865. Those are the same passcodes as last week’s meeting and the board clerk clarified the supervisors are transitioning to a recurring passcode.

The meeting also can be accessed via one tap mobile at +16694449171,,86533544962#,,,,*726865#. The meeting can also be accessed via phone at 669 900 6833.

At 9:30 a.m., the board will hold a public hearing to consider the appeal by John Oliver of Higher Ground Farms of the Planning Commission’s denial of his major use permit and initial study for a cannabis grow at 3545 Finley East Road, Kelseyville, in an area of prime farmland and next door to the historic Kelsey Creek Schoolhouse.

The schoolhouse sits on property owned by the Kelseyville Unified School District, which has an agreement with the Lucerne Area Revitalization Association which is restoring the building. The association was founded by Lake County News publishers Elizabeth Larson and John Jensen.

Higher Ground Farms, whose owner and appellant are from Mendocino County, would include 22,000 square feet of cannabis canopy inside eight greenhouses.

The Planning Commission voted down the project in January, raising questions about its altering of the viewshed of the Big Valley area, deficiencies in planning, potential for harm to the neighboring historic site and the potential negative impact on the neighborhood, which has no other cannabis operations of this type.

In untimed items, the board will consider a resolution establishing position allocations for the new public defender’s office and also discuss job reclassification proposals from the county’s Classification, Compensation, Recruitment and Retention Committee.

The full agenda follows.

CONSENT AGENDA

5.1: Approve continuation of local emergency by the Lake County Sheriff/OES DDirector for the 2024 Late January, Early February Winter Storms.

5.2: Approve continuation of proclamation declaring a Clear Lake Hitch Emergency.

5.3: Approve continuation of proclamation of the existence of a local emergency due to pervasive tree mortality.

5.4: Approve continuation of emergency proclamation declaring a shelter crisis in the county of Lake.

5.5: Approve continuation of proclamation of the existence of a local emergency due to low elevation snow and extreme cold.

5.6: Approve Judicial Advocate General Grant #15PBJA-21-GG-02842-JAGX Decline Letter and authorize chair to sign.

5.7: Approve reissuance of property tax refund check from FY 14/15 in the amount of $363.42 issued to Catherine Orloff Trustee.

5.8: Adopt proclamation designating the month of April 2024 as Alcohol Awareness Month in Lake County.

5.9: Approve Amendment No.1 to the agreement between county of Lake and Health Management Associates Inc. for support services for consulting services for fiscal year 2023-24 and authorize the board chair to sign.

5.10: Approve Amendment No. 1 to the agreement between county of Lake and Hilltop Recovery Services for co-occurring services in the amount of $28,800.00 for fiscal year 2023-24 and authorize the board chair to sign.

5.11: Adopt resolution authorizing amendment to the standard agreement between the county of Lake and the Department of Health Care Services for the period of July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2025 and Authorize the Behavioral Health director to sign the amendment.

5.12: Sitting as the Board of Directors, Lake County Watershed Protection District, adopt amendment to Resolution 2022-116 authorizing the Lake County Watershed Protection District Board chair to execute a lease agreement between the Lake County Watershed Protection District and the Scotts Valley Energy Corp.

5.13: Approve by-laws of the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council.

5.14: Approve the 2024-2025 Juvenile Justice Realignment Block Grant Plan.

5.15: Approve the qualified list from the request for qualifications for on-call architecture and engineering services.

5.16: A) Waive the competitive bidding process, pursuant to Lake County Code Section 2-38.2(3), based on the determination that competitive bidding would produce no economic benefit to the county, B) Authorize the Public Services Director / assistant purchasing agent to issue a purchase order not to exceed $120,000 to Mittry Construction Equipment Co. for a Caterpillar CT660 Heavy Duty Dump Truck.

5.17: a) Approve the general services agreement between the county of Lake and Optony Inc. for energy consulting services, and authorize the chair to sign the agreement; and b) approve supplemental services agreement number one for the Lake County Courthouse Campus Photovoltaic Array and Electric Vehicle Charging Station Project in an amount not to exceed $79,500, and authorize the chair to sign the agreement; and c) approve supplemental services agreement number two for photovoltaic system feasibility analysis, financial modeling, and procurement assistance for the Lakeport Library, Middletown Library, Redbud Library, and Probation Department in an amount not to exceed $30,000, and authorize the chair to sign the agreement.

5.18: Approve the supplemental services agreement number 5 between the county of Lake and Armstrong Consultants for engineering services related to Lampson Airfield and authorize the chair to sign the agreement.

5.19: a) Approve agreement for Federal Apportionment Exchange Program and State Match Program for California Department of Transportation - Non MPO County, Agreement No. X24-5914(134); and b) adopt resolution authorizing and directing the chair of the Board of Supervisors to execute the agreements for Federal Apportionment Exchange Program and State Match Program for California Department of Transportation – Non MPO County, Agreement No. X24-5914(134), and authorize the chair to sign the resolution and agreement.

5.20: Adopt resolution approving agreement with the state of California for Help America Vote Act (HAVA) Federal Funds in the Amount of $100,000, for activities to improve the administration of elections for Federal Office, including to enhance election technology and make election security improvements and authorizing the Registrar of Voters to execute the agreement with the state.

5.21: Approve contract between county of Lake and California Department of Social Services for Quality Assurance Case Review, in the amount of $108,695.00 from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2029, and authorize the chair to sign.

TIMED ITEMS

6.2, 9:03 a.m.: Pet of the Week.

6.3, 9:04 a.m.: Presentation of Proclamation Designating the Month of April 2024 as Alcohol Awareness Month in Lake County.

6.4, 9:10 a.m.: Presentation of the North Coast Opportunities Building Up Individuals and Local Development, or BUILD, Program.

6.5, 9:30 a.m.: Public hearing, consideration of appeal (AB 24-01) of Planning Commission’s denial of major use permit (UP 20-40), Higher Ground Farms / John Oliver, applicant and appellant; location: 3545 Finley East Road, Kelseyville (APN: 008-026-07)(CONTINUED FROM MARCH 12, 2024).

6.6, 10:30 a.m.: Consideration of an agreement for professional communications and public relations services with Imprenta Communications Group Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $264,000 over three years.

6.7, 11:20 a.m.: Consideration of a resolution amending the master fee schedule for departmental services rendered by the county.

UNTIMED ITEMS

7.2: a) Annual Lake County PEG presentation; and b) discussion on continued PEG MAC support.

7.3: Consideration of draft ordinance repealing Urgency Ordinance 3113 Amending Ordinance 3110 prohibiting water hauling to unpermitted cannabis cultivation sites.

7.4: Consideration of rescission of Urgency Ordinance 3106 requiring land use applicants to provide enhanced water analysis during a declared drought emergency.

7.5: Consideration of resolution amending Scotts Valley Community Advisory Council boundary map.

7.6: Report to the board regarding Lake County Behavioral Health Services' revenue and expenditures and loan status.

7.7: Consideration of Amendment No. 1 to the agreement between county of Lake and BHC Heritage Oaks Hospital Inc. for acute inpatient psychiatric hospital services and professional services associated with acute inpatient psychiatric hospitalization in the amount of $175,000.00 for fiscal year 23-24 and authorize the board chair to sign.

7.8: Consideration of Amendment No. 3 to the agreement between the county of Lake and the Smithwaters Group in the amount of $210,000 for patient rights advocacy services for fiscal years 2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25.

7.9: Consideration and discussion of contract with HS Gov Tech Solutions Inc. for the license, configuration, support and hosting of the Lake County Environmental Health database management software for an amount not to exceed $400,093.21 and authorize chair to sign.

7.10: Consideration of resolution amending Resolution No. 2023-117 establishing position allocations for fiscal year 2023-2024, Budget Unit No. 2111 Public Defender.

7.11: Consideration of the Classification, Compensation, Recruitment, and Retention Committee 2023-2024 Reclassification Cycle Findings and Recommendations.

CLOSED SESSION

8.1, 3 p.m.: Public employee appointment pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54957(b) (1): Interviews for Special District administrator; appointment of Special District administrator.

8.2: Public employee appointment pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54957(b) (1): Interviews for Water Resources director; appointment of Water Resources director.

8.3: Public employee appointment pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54957(b) (1): Interviews for Social Services director; appointment of Social Services director.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Follow her on Twitter, @ERLarson, or Lake County News, @LakeCoNews.

Fires pose growing worldwide threat to wildland-urban interface areas

Details
Written by: U.S. National Science Foundation National Center for Atmospheric Research
Published: 22 April 2024
Scientists construct global maps of burned areas at edge of cities


Fires that blaze through the wildland-urban interface, or WUI, are becoming more common around the globe, a trend that is likely to continue for at least the next two decades, new research finds.

The research team, led by scientists at the U.S. National Science Foundation National Center for Atmospheric Research, or NSF NCAR, used satellite observations and machine learning techniques to produce a unique database of WUI areas and fires worldwide, dating back about two decades.

The overall number of all fires worldwide has declined, as has the total area burned.

However, the scientists found that the fraction of global fires that occur in WUI areas increased by about 23% from 2005 to 2020. Even more significantly, the global area burned by WUI fires during the same time increased by about 35% as a fraction of all burned areas.

The research found that WUI areas are expanding worldwide, especially in rapidly urbanizing regions in Africa. As newly constructed developments move into areas of wild vegetation, the risk of fires increases. The paper did not focus on the role of climate change, although the authors said the database can help scientists better fingerprint the role of climate change in fires.

WUI areas are generally defined as the location where urban land use and wildland vegetation come into contact or intermingle. Fires in such areas are especially dangerous, both because they imperil large numbers of people and structures and because, by burning manufactured materials instead of vegetation, they emit far more toxins than forest and grassland fires.

“Wildland-urban interface fires are a major concern for many people in the United States and globally, and through this study we now know they have increased in recent years and will likely continue doing so in the future,” said NSF NCAR scientist Wenfu Tang, the lead author of the new paper. “This is important as a first step to looking at emissions from these fires and their impacts on human health.”

Funding for the research came from NOAA. The study was published in Environmental Research Letters.

Constructing a global database

WUI fires have caused catastrophic destruction in recent years, sometimes burning down thousands of buildings and killing 100 or more people.

Especially destructive fires include the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires in Australia, which left 173 dead, and the 2017 Pedrosa Grande Fire in Portugal, which killed 66 people.

Last year’s Lahaina Fire in Hawaii was the deadliest in the United States in more than a century, killing 100 people and destroying more than 2,200 structures.

To understand more about trends in WUI fires, Tang and her colleagues turned to a global high-resolution map of WUI fires in 2020, which had been created by Franz Schug of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

They also analyzed data about Earth’s surface from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer, or MODIS, satellite instrument.

By applying machine learning techniques to the map and satellite data, they quantified the relationship of fires with such variables as land cover and population density. They then used those quantitative relationships to generate a global database of WUI areas and WUI fires, going back 20 years at a resolution of 9 kilometers (5.6 miles).

The researchers successfully confirmed the accuracy of the database by comparing it with independent WUI datasets previously developed for a few years within the same time period, including for the continental United States and globally.

In analyzing the new database, the researchers found that WUI areas have grown in all populated continents by 24% from 2001 to 2020, with the largest increase occurring in Africa.

Largely as a result, fires in WUI areas have also become more common. Since 2005, they have increased from 3.5% to 4.3% of all fires. In North America, the WUI fraction of all fire counts is even higher (up to 9%), with WUI fires in 2015-2020 becoming particularly large and more destructive.

“This is the first map of its kind that enables us to look at how WUI fires have been evolving globally over the past two decades,” said NSF NCAR scientist Cenlin He, a co-author of the study. “It shows that WUI fires have increased on every populated continent.”

Even as WUI blazes loom as a greater threat, the scientists noted that fires overall have been on the decline. Since 2005, the total number of fires worldwide decreased by 10%, and the amount of burned areas decreased by 22%, according to satellite observations analyzed in their research.

Tang and her colleagues then turned to the future. They integrated the WUI database with the NSF NCAR-based Community Earth System Model, which simulates global climate and fires, to determine the likely trends in WUI fires through 2030 and 2040.

If WUI areas continue to expand and greenhouse gases continue to be emitted at a high rate, they found that the WUI fraction of burned areas worldwide will likely increase by about 2.6-3.2% by 2040. However, the picture can change somewhat depending on changes in WUI areas and greenhouse gas emissions under different future scenarios, according to their analysis.

“This study is an important step in quantifying WUI fires and how they are changing worldwide,” Tang said. “As WUI areas rapidly expand and WUI fires become more frequent, it is critical to understand the interactions between WUI fires and human activities as well as the impacts of the fires on air quality, human health, and the environment.”

Removing PFAS from public water systems will cost billions and take time – here are ways you can filter out harmful ‘forever chemicals’ at home

Details
Written by: Kyle Doudrick, University of Notre Dame
Published: 22 April 2024

 

PFAS are showing up in water systems across the U.S. Jacek Dylag/Unsplash, CC BY

Chemists invented PFAS in the 1930s to make life easier: Nonstick pans, waterproof clothing, grease-resistant food packaging and stain-resistant carpet were all made possible by PFAS. But in recent years, the growing number of health risks found to be connected to these chemicals has become increasingly alarming.

PFAS – perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances – are now either suspected or known to contribute to thyroid disease, elevated cholesterol, liver damage and cancer, among other health issues.

They can be found in the blood of most Americans and in many drinking water systems, which is why the Environmental Protection Agency in April 2024 finalized the first enforceable federal limits for six types of PFAS in drinking water systems. The limits – between 4 and 10 parts per trillion for PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, PFNA and GenX – are less than a drop of water in a thousand Olympic-sized swimming pools, which speaks to the chemicals’ toxicity. The sixth type, PFBS, is regulated as a mixture using what’s known as a hazard index.

Meeting these new limits won’t be easy or cheap. And there’s another problem: While PFAS can be filtered out of water, these “forever chemicals” are hard to destroy.

My team at the University of Notre Dame works on solving problems involving contaminants in water systems, including PFAS. We explore new technologies to remove PFAS from drinking water and to handle the PFAS waste. Here’s a glimpse of the magnitude of the challenge and ways you can reduce PFAS in your own drinking water:

Removing PFAS will cost billions per year

Every five years, the EPA is required to choose 30 unregulated contaminants to monitor in public drinking water systems. Right now, 29 of those 30 contaminants are PFAS. The tests provide a sense of just how widespread PFAS are in water systems and where.

The EPA has taken over 22,500 samples from about 3,800 of the 154,000 public drinking water systems in the U.S. In 22% of those water systems, its testing found at least one of the six newly regulated PFAS, and about 16% of the systems exceeded the new standards. East Coast states had the largest percentage of systems with PFAS levels exceeding the new standards in EPA tests conducted so far.

Under the new EPA rules, public water systems have until 2027 to complete monitoring for PFAS and provide publicly available data. If they find PFAS at concentrations that exceed the new limits, then they must install a treatment system by 2029.

How much that will cost public water systems, and ultimately their customers, is still a big unknown, but it won’t be cheap.

The EPA estimated the cost to the nation’s public drinking water systems to comply with the news rules at about US$1.5 billion per year. But other estimates suggest the total costs of testing and cleaning up PFAS contamination will be much higher. The American Water Works Association put the cost at over $3.8 billion per year for PFOS and PFOA alone.

There are more than 5,000 chemicals that are considered PFAS, yet only a few have been studied for their toxicity, and even fewer tested for in drinking water. The United States Geological Survey estimates that nearly half of all tap water is contaminated with PFAS.

Some money for testing and cleanup will come from the federal government. Other funds will come from 3M and DuPont, the leading makers of PFAS. 3M agreed in a settlement to pay between $10.5 billion to $12.5 billion to help reimburse public water systems for some of their PFAS testing and treatment. But public water systems will still bear additional costs, and those costs will be passed on to residents.

Next problem: Disposing of ‘forever chemicals’

Another big question is how to dispose of the captured PFAS once they have been filtered out.

Landfills are being considered, but that just pushes the problem to the next generation. PFAS are known as “forever chemicals” for a reason – they are incredibly resilient and don’t break down naturally, so they are hard to destroy.

Studies have shown that PFAS can be broken down with energy-intensive technologies. But this comes with steep costs. Incinerators must reach over 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit (1,000 Celsius) to destroy PFAS, and the possibility of creating potentially harmful byproducts is not yet well understood. Other suggested techniques, such as supercritical water oxidation or plasma reactors, have the same drawbacks.

So who is responsible for managing that PFAS waste? Ultimately the responsibility will likely fall on public drinking water systems.

The EPA on April 19, 2024, designated PFOA and PFOS as eligible contaminants for Superfund status, which means companies that are responsible for contaminating sites with those chemicals can be required to pay for cleanup. However, the EPA said it did not intend to go after wastewater treatment plants or public landfills.

Steps to protect your home from PFAS

Your first instinct might be to use bottled water to try to avoid PFAS exposures, but a recent study found that even bottled water can contain these chemicals. And bottled water is regulated by a different federal agency, the Food and Drug Administration, which has no standards for PFAS.

Your best option is to rely on the same technologies that treatment facilities will be using:

  • Activated carbon is similar to charcoal. Like a sponge, it will capture the PFAS, removing it from the water. This is the same technology in refrigerator filters and in some water pitcher filters, like Brita or PUR. Note that many refrigerator manufacture’s filters are not certified for PFAS, so don’t assume they will remove PFAS to safe levels.

  • Ion exchange resin is the same technology found in many home water softeners. Like activated carbon, it captures PFAS from the water, and you can find this technology in many pitcher filter products. If you opt for a whole house treatment system, which a plumber can attach where the water enters the house, ion exchange resin is probably the best choice. But it is expensive.

  • Reverse osmosis is a membrane technology that only allows water and select compounds to pass through the membrane, while PFAS are blocked. This is commonly installed at the kitchen sink and has been found to be very effective at removing most PFAS in water. It is not practical for whole house treatment, but it is likely to remove a lot of other contaminants as well.

If you have a private well instead of a public drinking water system, that doesn’t mean you’re safe from PFAS exposure. Wisconsin’s Department of Natural Resources estimates that 71% of shallow private wells in that state have some level of PFAS contamination. Using a certified laboratory to test well water for PFAS can run $300-$600 per sample, a cost barrier that will leave many private well owners in the dark.

For all the treatment options, make sure the device you choose is certified for PFAS by a reputable testing agency, and follow the recommended schedule for maintenance and filter replacement. Unfortunately, there is currently no safe way to dispose of the filters, so they go in the trash. No treatment option is perfect, and none is likely to remove all PFAS down to safe levels, but some treatment is better than none.

This article, originally published April 17, 2024, has been updated with EPA’s Superfund declaration.The Conversation

Kyle Doudrick, Associate Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Notre Dame

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

  1. April is Alcohol Awareness Month: Statewide program helps ABC licensees stay in compliance
  2. California State Parks encourages all to celebrate Earth Day
  3. Thompson votes to support supplemental package for key national security priorities
  • 705
  • 706
  • 707
  • 708
  • 709
  • 710
  • 711
  • 712
  • 713
  • 714
How to resolve AdBlock issue?
Refresh this page