Hygeia AnalyticsLogo

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • About Hygeia
    Analytics
    • Dynamic Presentations
    • Keywords and Site Map
    • Hygeia Analytics – Who We Are
    • Why Hygeia?
    • Funding and “Sound Science”
    • Acronyms and Glossary
    • Sign-Up for Updates
  • Nutrition
    • Introduction and Nutrition 101
      • Good Fat Bad Fat
      • Fatty Acids
        • Primer on the Fatty Acids in Milk
      • Impact of Livestock Feeding
    • Antioxidants
      • Organic Farming Elevates Antioxidants
      • Maximizing Antioxidant Intake
    • Organic vs. Conventional Foods
      • Milk and Dairy Products
        • 2018 Grassmilk Paper
        • PLOS ONE Study
        • Dairy Meta-Analysis
      • Multi Food Meta-Analyses
        • Meat Products
        • Plant-Based Foods
        • Smith-Spangler et al.
        • Dangour et al.
        • The Organic Center Report
      • Food Specific Comparisons
        • General
        • Fruits and Vegetables
        • Wine and Wine Grapes
    • Considering Nutritional Quality
      • Impact of Genetics and Production Systems
      • New Tool for Food Security
      • Transforming Jane Doe’s Diet
      • Nutritional Quality Index
    • Nutrient Decline
    • Other Choices and Challenges
      • Human Health
      • Dietary Choices
  • Pesticides
    • Usage
      • Pesticide Use Data Sources
        • Pesticide Use Indicators
      • PUDS – The Pesticide Use Data System
    • Dietary Risks
      • The Dietary Risk Index (DRI)
    • Risk Assessment and Regulation
      • Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA)
      • Glyphosate/Roundup Case Study
      • The Lowdown on Roundup
      • Does Glyphosate/Roundup Cause Cancer?
      • 2019 Glyphosate Genotoxicity Paper
    • Impacts of GE on Pesticide Use
    • Environmental, Human Health, and Other Impacts of Pesticides
  • Ag Biotech
    • Key Historical Documents – Donald Duvick
    • Key Historical Documents – Arpad Pusztai
    • Herbicide Resistant Crops
    • Weed Resistance
    • Bt Transgenic Crops
    • Resistant Insects
    • Health Risks and Safety Assessments
    • Regulation of GE Crop Technology
    • Marketing, Economics, and Public Relations
    • Patenting and Intellectual Property Issues
    • Labeling
  • Other Issues
    • Animal Products
    • The Future of Food
    • Global Food Security
    • Natural Resources and Climate Change
    • Alternatives to Industrial Ag
    • Policy and Politics
    • Scientific Integrity
    • Soil Health
    • Yields
  • Recent Posts
    • Hot Science
    • In The News
    • Hygeia’s Blog
  • Special
    Coverage
    • Organic Apples in Washington State
    • Dicamba Drift Crisis
    • Organic Food Consumption Lowers Cancer Risk
    • Organic Integrity

EPA Internal Investigation Reveals Deep Flaws in Regulation of Pollution from Fertilizing Fields with Sewage Sludge

Posted on November 27, 2018 in Environmental Impacts, In The News | 274 Views

In a report released this month, EPA’s Office of Inspector General lays out in no uncertain terms that EPA’s regulation of land-applied biosolids “had weaknesses and may not fully protect human health and the environment.”

This “sewage sludge” is “solid, semisolid or liquid residue generated during the treatment of domestic sewage.”  After processing at wastewater treatment plants, the resulting product “can be used for agricultural and residential soil fertilization.”

But, the EPA’s own internal assessment revealed that biosolids are routinely monitored for only nine regulated pollutants, even though studies conducted between 1989-2015 showed there more than 352 pollutants can be found in biosolids, including 61 that are designated “hazardous” or are priorities for monitoring in other programs. And we are talking about some pretty nasty stuff, according to EPA’s own documentation sewage sludge can contain pharmaceutical compounds like steroids and persistent chemicals such as flame retardants.

This program review also points out that “reduced staff and resources in the biosolids program over time” has made it difficult to address the “weaknesses identified in the program.” Many risk assessments for pollutants known to be in biosolids are incomplete and available labels and documentation “do not explain the full spectrum of pollutants in biosolids and the uncertainty regarding their safety.”

This is a damming report, one that, remember, was produced by the EPA’s own staff. Recommendations for improvement include investing in research on additional pollutants found in biosolids that should be included in regular monitoring, and improving the transparency of information available via the EPA’s website and include on labeling and other documentation.

We will be watching to see whether EPA takes their own advice and makes these important improvements to how we regulate the fertilizer that goes on our food.

Source:

EPA, “EPA Unable to Assess the Impact of Hundreds of Unregulated Pollutants in Land-Applied Biosolids on Human Health and the Environment,” At a Glance report of review by the Office of Inspector General, November 15, 2018.

Posted in Environmental Impacts, In The News | Tagged Policy and Politics

Related Posts

FAQs re Biden-Harris Ag and EPA Transition Priorities→

Implications of EPA’s Decision to Renew Dicamba Registration for Over-the-Top Use→

Dr. Benbrook Testifies Before the Philadelphia City Council as they Consider Glyphosate Ban→

Guest Blog: The Big Meat Gang Is Getting Awfully Smelly→

Why Promoting Organic Integrity Must Become a Top Priority for USDA→

Guest Blog: Finding the Root Cause of Organic Fraud→

So What About the Integrity of the U.S. Organic Grain Supply?→

Guest Blog: Organic Food & Pesticide Residues, One Grower’s Perspective→

©2016 Hygeia-Analytics.com. All Rights Reserved.

Menu