How does Spokane's aquifer stay clean with a polluted river and city right above it? (Republic: homes, to buy)

[ca_north]

I'm having trouble reconciling bad news about pollution in the Spokane river with the claim that Spokane's tap water is "safe," seeing as the river interacts with the aquifer along most of its length. Can't river-borne PCBs, mining waste with lead, etc, get into the aquifer easily? Republicans in Idaho have stonewalled efforts to clean up Lake Coeur d'Alene and other mining waste sources. Spokane is downriver from that ignore-pollution/money-is-God mentality; or is it embedded in the mindset of the whole region?

Spokane river endangered aquifer - Google Search (tainted river system)

Water Quality | City of Spokane Water Department (is this consistently true?)

City of Spokane encouraging us to give tap water another try | Feb 13, 2009 | DownToEarthNW.com

The above link implies that locals don't trust the tap water, or are just into wasting money & plastic. On a recent trip to Spokane I saw a woman with a shopping cart packed full of bottled water (Broadway at Sullivan Wal-Mart). Is that common?

The city of Spokane advises people to not eat fish caught from the river, so why is the aquifer water below it considered safe to drink? Is it filtered at all before being pumped to homes? I don't understand how groundwater under any city can be considered healthy minus filtration, with many people who barely think about what they dump on the ground. In CA I have seen those fish plaques near storm drains ignored on several occasions, and it's probably widespread.

If anyone has extensively studied this issue for the sake of their health and has a scientific opinion, please post. Maybe someone from the water dept. will read this.

[CoreLysium]

Originally Posted by ca_north

1. Can't river-borne PCBs, mining waste with lead, etc, get into the aquifer easily?

2. Spokane is downriver from that ignore-pollution/money-is-God mentality; or is it embedded in the mindset of the whole region?

3. On a recent trip to Spokane I saw a woman with a shopping cart packed full of bottled water (Broadway at Sullivan Wal-Mart). Is that common?

4. The city of Spokane advises people to not eat fish caught from the river, so why is the aquifer water below it considered safe to drink?

5. Is it filtered at all before being pumped to homes?

I added numbers to answer your questions which removed most of the inflammatory remarks.

1. Not really. You're not going to be able to concentrate PCBs unless you get some larger fish or maybe birds that eat the larger fish. You have to concentrate it through the food chain. Little fish gets some, gets eaten by medium fish that eats lots and lots of little fish, gets eaten by big fish that eats lots and lots of medium fish. The concentrations you see in the big fish can be 2000x higher than the water. In addition, PCBs are only toxic when exposed to chlorine, which is why you don't want to eat them, as we drink chlorine on a regular basis (though not adding Cl to the water makes a slime layer of toxic anerobic bacteria in the pipes that'll kill you dead. If you don't like the taste, get a Britta.)

2. I don't understand what you're asking. "No" is probably the best answer.

3. The portability of water has really taken an upswing with the ease of production due to recycling. It's even to the point that it is uncommon to see a person bringing water in a bottle not originally sold for water drinking purposes to a sporting event. Many people who work outside or want to just drink water when they are commuting will buy bottled water. Many companies have tried to limit the use of plastic used for their bottles. The one I actually have a gripe with is Nestlé Pure Life. How thin can you make a bottle until it's just a bag. I try to open the thing and it spurts on me. (I keep a pack of bottles in the trunk of my car so I don't buy sodas, etc. And, notice no one gripes about soda bottles. Odd that.)

4. Yes. See 1.

5. Most ground or river water is mechanically filtered to remove solids. Chlorination is added to kill any microbes and keep transportation safe (see 1.)

Disclaimer: I do not work in the water supply field. I work as an environmental analyst that protects the rivers (in Alabama) from pollutants which come down the sanitary sewer system. And since the sludge from the WWTPs are burned with municipal waste, thus protect the air and land where the ash is buried. I haven't worked with riparian zone concerns in over a decade. Here, and I suspect in Idaho, the main pollutant in the waterways is fertilizer runoff. Trivia: Our WWTPs have been fined for returning water that was too clean to the Tennessee River. True story.

Edited to add: I forget which water brand I used to buy, but I then found out it was tap water from Houston, TX. Good water, though.

[Gladys Kravitz]

Well, to answer the original question, the water supply is just fine without the any interference from unhappy people that use junk science for tawdry political ends. Hope that answers the question.

[aplcr0331]

I've lived in Spokane for 30 years and drink the tap water all the time.

You can eat Rainbow Trout and Yellow Perch from the Spokane. You are advised to avoid fish from the area between Upriver Dam and the Idaho border however.

The health of the river is actually improving, so there is hope.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by CoreLysium

I added numbers to answer your questions which removed most of the inflammatory remarks.

1. Not really. You're not going to be able to concentrate PCBs unless you get some larger fish or maybe birds that eat the larger fish. You have to concentrate it through the food chain. Little fish gets some, gets eaten by medium fish that eats lots and lots of little fish, gets eaten by big fish that eats lots and lots of medium fish. The concentrations you see in the big fish can be 2000x higher than the water. In addition, PCBs are only toxic when exposed to chlorine, which is why you don't want to eat them, as we drink chlorine on a regular basis (though not adding Cl to the water makes a slime layer of toxic anerobic bacteria in the pipes that'll kill you dead. If you don't like the taste, get a Britta.)

2. I don't understand what you're asking. "No" is probably the best answer.

3. The portability of water has really taken an upswing with the ease of production due to recycling. It's even to the point that it is uncommon to see a person bringing water in a bottle not originally sold for water drinking purposes to a sporting event. Many people who work outside or want to just drink water when they are commuting will buy bottled water. Many companies have tried to limit the use of plastic used for their bottles. The one I actually have a gripe with is Nestlé Pure Life. How thin can you make a bottle until it's just a bag. I try to open the thing and it spurts on me. (I keep a pack of bottles in the trunk of my car so I don't buy sodas, etc. And, notice no one gripes about soda bottles. Odd that.)

4. Yes. See 1.

5. Most ground or river water is mechanically filtered to remove solids. Chlorination is added to kill any microbes and keep transportation safe (see 1.)

Disclaimer: I do not work in the water supply field. I work as an environmental analyst that protects the rivers (in Alabama) from pollutants which come down the sanitary sewer system. And since the sludge from the WWTPs are burned with municipal waste, thus protect the air and land where the ash is buried. I haven't worked with riparian zone concerns in over a decade. Here, and I suspect in Idaho, the main pollutant in the waterways is fertilizer runoff. Trivia: Our WWTPs have been fined for returning water that was too clean to the Tennessee River. True story.

Edited to add: I forget which water brand I used to buy, but I then found out it was tap water from Houston, TX. Good water, though.

#2 refers to Idaho's refusal to clean up Lake Coeur d'Alene mining wastes, which exemplifies Republican "values" on environmental quality. I'm concerned about the water in an area downstream from that mindset, but I guess I'll have to trust that water tests from the aquifer are legit. Apparently this is an issue locals don't give much thought to, but readership of these posts obviously varies.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by Gladys Kravitz

Well, to answer the original question, the water supply is just fine without the any interference from unhappy people that use junk science for tawdry political ends. Hope that answers the question.

Your definition of "junk science" probably includes that radical, evidence-free notion that global warming is man-made. Am I right?

Part of the reason I posted this was to get an idea of Spokaners' concern for nature in general. I know a few samples of opinions isn't much of a way to do that, though.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by aplcr0331

I've lived in Spokane for 30 years and drink the tap water all the time.

You can eat Rainbow Trout and Yellow Perch from the Spokane. You are advised to avoid fish from the area between Upriver Dam and the Idaho border however.

The health of the river is actually improving, so there is hope.

I assume that dam traps a lot of the mining waste sediment. It just makes me uneasy to see such warnings. Progress seems slow, from what I'm reading, with lot of push-back from politics upstream. That's the problem with things like rivers and air that don't know artificial borders.

[aplcr0331]

Originally Posted by ca_north

I assume that dam traps a lot of the mining waste sediment. It just makes me uneasy to see such warnings. Progress seems slow, from what I'm reading, with lot of push-back from politics upstream. That's the problem with things like rivers and air that don't know artificial borders.

Yep, it seems "fishy" that you can eat the fish in certain areas of the river, but not others. Some of the other areas are actually downstream. I'm no wildlife biologist but is that not where the fish are swimming?

The river is getting better and there are some groups in Spokane doing a lot to clean it up. Most long time residents do our part too. It's a great resource.

[Gladys Kravitz]

@ca_north

"Part of the reason I posted this was to get an idea of Spokaners' concern for nature in general."

The people of Spokane are breathlessly awaiting your judgment.

[ca_north]

Originally Posted by Gladys Kravitz

@ca_north

"Part of the reason I posted this was to get an idea of Spokaners' concern for nature in general."

The people of Spokane are breathlessly awaiting your judgment.

I understand that it's all about "rights" and puttin' them outside interlopers in their place. The actual science of the situation gets trivialized.

There are two basic attitudes toward nature:

1) Concern for keeping it as pristine as possible, regardless of what resources people demand from it.
2) Primarily interested in what people can take from it economically, while maintaining a facade of environmental protection.

#2 often gets described as "balance" but it tends to mean slow degradation, especially as an area's population grows.

I get your "Gladys Kravitz" joke, but it shows that attitude #2 is probably how you think.