Municipal Water Systems - Research Paper Example

Municipal Water Systems Introduction Water comes second after oxygen as being the most essential element that life, particularly human, relies on for existence. Science revealed to us that two-thirds of our bodies are made up of water, and from this, we can relate this to the lifelong demand for water by humans. In the ancient eras, water was available in springs, rivers, lakes, and other water sources, which was sufficient and readily available to the earthlings of that time whose populations were manageable by nature. However, as their populations expanded with the birth of the urbanized area, people had to disperse away from water sources to avoid exerting pressure on the naturally-existing water sources, but the fact remained that they required water to survive. That is when the idea of channeling water supply to distant places away from water sources came up, and has developed so much over the centuries into what we now have- municipal/ public water systems. This text will provide an insight into the entire establishment, running, involved activities, challenges encountered, and all other activities involved until clean, safe water is available for the end-user in American homes’ taps. In addition, it will cover the handling of waste water, which requires control to avoid contamination. Nursing plays a role in the municipal water system in that it understands what the human body accepts, and also what it cannot accept to take. This is to say that nursing can test municipal water at the point of the end-user and tell whether it suits or fails to meet the set standards which qualify it as okay and safe for human consumption. The safety of water depends on some factors such as where the water is drawn from, how the treatment of the water is done, and the entire delivery system until it gets to the taps of the consumers. In short, nursing requires having a full understanding of the entire acquisition, most importantly the treatment process, and the process of getting the water. To better understand the process which qualifies municipal drinking water as safe for drinking, this study will explain in depth the process of water treatment at the Philadelphia (Fairmont) Water Works. The water works are probably the most famous in the world, with a long serving history of supplying water to Americans with minimal complaints or blunders arising from their water. Concisely, the Fairmont Water Works is a great example of an effective and credible municipal water supplier. History of municipal water systems in the United States The need for clean water technologies in the United States as (Davis 2008) reveals were inspired by a mortality increase in the late 19th century in urban areas, upon which research into the issue indicated that lack of adequate clean water was responsible. Large-scale water systems in the United States date back to 1801, which in the American history was a milestone achievement in that firefighting was upgraded, investors were attracted to the United States and most of all, and development was greatly boosted. However, according to Cutler and Miller (2006), this did not solve water problems at household levels, and most Americans continued relying on privies and wells. This was not problematic until the rapid growth in population resulted in degradation of the existing water sources, and together with ineffective and insufficient sewage removal and low understanding of disease, there was an outcry demanding better water systems for all. Despite the ability to materialize the installation of public water systems, the United States lagged behind in this context owing to what studies attribute to bad governance marred with corruption and neglect. The onset of the 19th century saw a better understanding of disease arise, and together with the growing demand for domestic water owing to the virility in population, the government bowed to pressure and public water systems began to grow. The better understanding of disease blew away the old notion that foul smell, decomposing matter and bad air were the cause of disease transmission. Sanitarians realized that bacteria, and not the mentioned latter were responsible for diseases, and that lack of clean, sufficient water management systems was the catalyst in the spread (Barraque 2010). Philadelphia was amongst the most affected by filth and waste from end to end of the city, a status that was nobody’s concern until yellow fever set in, consuming the lives of many dwellers in the city. This was, according to (Wang 2010), made worse by the fact that even the few existing water systems were polluted by the filth, further circumscribing the residents into health hazards. Relief arrived in 1805 when the Philadelphia Watering Commission decided to come up with a one-time water solution by creating a mega water work scheme that would house reservoirs, pumping machinery, enough piping, buildings, and storage tanks to solve the water problem. Engineer Frederick Graff was to oversee the construction of the water works, and his plans consisted of using coal and firewood to heat water and provide high-pressure steam to turn steam turbines that would act as water pumps to channel water from River Schuylkill up to a reservoir constructed on top of Free Mount. The idea was to supply water to the city by use of gravity, a project that bloomed quite fast, and in addition to the people surrounding the reservoir with gardens, the (Philadelphia) Fairmount Water Works gained local and overseas recognition, attracting even tourists. After its completion in 1843, the water works had a supply capacity of five point three million gallons of fresh water daily, at what Wang refers to as a “shockingly low cost”. To this day, the Fairmount Water Works remain a globally-recognized American ingenuity, acting as a role model project to other municipalities worldwide. Public water in the United States in monitored and regulated by the EPA, although this does not include private wells. The EPA requires an assisting body in controlling the water so that it gets to the users in a clean, safe nature, ready for drinking, and this is where nursing comes into play. Nursing is concerned with the overall health of the people, and understands that water is a notorious agent of distributing ailments in case it gets contaminated anywhere along its way to the consumer. On its way, water can be contaminated by non-point and point sources. Point sources are sources of contamination which can be traced, as in, it is possible to narrow down to the source of contamination. An example, could be a leakage from an industry’s wastewater system which releases wastewater into a municipal water system. The non-point sources of water contamination are those with indefinite places of origin, and are not traceable. For instance, pesticide-contaminated water can run off from agricultural farmland and end up in water sources such as rivers. These are the main reasons why the water has to undergo the complicated water treatment process; to get rid of the contaminants which bear pathogens, thus can cause serious health problems to humans. The water treatment process is regulated by the EPA, and adheres to standards set by the same body to ensure that people do not get exposed to waterborne diseases as was the case in ancient Philadelphia. The section below will explain the history of the said water treatment process in the United States in detail from the point it is drawn from its source to the time it gets to the consumer as safe for human consumption. History of water purification/ treatment Philadelphia Water Treatment Plant took to purify water after the 19th century experienced bouts of death and illnesses caused by dysentery, typhoid, and cholera; all of which were waterborne. This move was proposed by scientists who discovered that unsafe drinking water was the root cause of the outbreaks. Water purification initially used chlorine adhering to the EPA and state, federal laws that require of all public water supplies to be disinfected. Chlorine works by reacting with natural water components to form compounds that are safe disinfectants such as Trihalomethanes. The Philadelphia Water Treatment Plant has an output of 310 million gallons of treated water a day capacity, shared by three treatment facilities; the Baxter with a 200 million gallon capacity, the Belmont plant with a 40 million gallon capacity, and finally the Queen Lane Water plant with a 70 million daily gallon capacity (Philadelphia Water Department” 2014). The water treatment process According to Spellman (2008), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1986 dictated that all public water had to meet some set standards, and authorized the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to oversee its implementation. This move was to prevent contamination of public water. The natures of the Act are as follows: 1. To assess and protect water sources meant for drinking purposes and implement all possible means to keep contaminants and microbes from getting into water supplies. Among these is averting animal and human activity around water bodies. 2. To optimize through the disinfecting and filtering water, in addition to accrediting the personnel authorized to handle or work around water treatment facilities. The said personnel have to posses creditable knowledge regarding [public] health. 3. To observe and see to it that the integrity of water distribution systems is unquestionable, thus whatever waters the client gets is of good consumption quality. 4. To effect correct control and policies with regard to cross-connections which in most cases pose as potential hazards. 5. Regular testing and monitoring of the treated water before it gets to the client as a measure to protect them from improper treatment, thus reduce contamination risks by mediating incase of unidentified loopholes occurring during the process. The following section will highlight the process involved in purifying water at the treatment station from the moment it is pumped from the source, to the instant it leaves the treatment plant palatable, and ready for consumption as per Hendricks’ (2010) illustration. It is important to note that raw water has different characteristics determined by the level of contamination that it has been exposed to. This in turn determines the level of treatment that the water will have to undergo. Surface water from rivers, reservoirs and lakes will require more complex treatment than water from ground sources such as boreholes or wells. Step 1: Screening This is the first process in the treatment process, and which is executed either physically, mechanically, chemically to remove physical debris such as rocks or sticks. Chemicals are used to control algae growth while pre-sedimentation is applied to remove gravel, grit, and sand from the raw water. Step 2: Flocculation, coagulation and clarification The screening process does not remove minute particles such as microbes and materials that suspend in raw water. As such, it requires chemical intervention in which case Alum is added to the water, resulting in coagulation (clumping together of small particles). The water and Alum are further mixed so the clumped particles further merge to form flocks which settle out of the water in a process called flocculation. After this, the water undergoes clarification or sedimentation in which the water flows slowly through a basin allowing sludge or solid residue to settle out of the water from where it is pumped out. Step 3: Softening and stabilization The water is now free of solid impurities, only retaining chemical residues that contribute to water hardness when minerals, magnesium, and calcium are present. Apart from having an unpleasant taste, hard water can clog transmission pipes, and complicate laundering. On the other note if these elements are missing from the water completely, the water corrodes water pipes, and for that reason, a balance has to be established between softness and hardness of water. To do this (stabilize), minerals are added to soft water, and reduced with hard water. Calcium Carbonate is used to measure the hardness or softness of the water. Step 4: Fluoridation and Disinfection At this stage, fluoride is added to the water either as a solution or in powder form. The aim is to prevent tooth decay. However, extra fluoride can lead to fluorosis (discolored teeth) thus a need to use a Fluoride test to determine the quantity of fluoride amount in the water. After this, all living organisms in the water are eliminated by the addition of chlorine, which is the most popular disinfectant. Chlorine is preferred because one, it dissipates fast, and two; disinfection does not stop along the pipes until the water gets to the consumer. The water is further exposed to UV to completely eliminate any organisms that might resist chlorine disinfection. Municipal water has advantages and disadvantages as well. The biggest advantage is that the water is clean as compared to its original state, it comes in surplus quantities, and that is affordable to most Americans. The treatment is also an added advantage. However, the water presents some disadvantages as well. One, mechanical breakdowns may cut out water supply, or some small neglect or fault in the treatment or supplying of the water may result in massive disease outbreaks. These are not regular occurrences, though. The real big advantage is the reality that the treatment chemicals used in purifying the water are themselves contaminants upon mixing with some elements found in the water. The contaminants are in every drop of water we drink, and that is a reason enough to get worried. The nursing fraternity understands that although the water that comes out at this point is “safe” for drinking, it is not as safe. The biggest reason is that some of the chemicals used in the treatment process might actually turn to contaminants themselves. It is crucial for the any public health nurse to understand these contaminations often defined as DBP’s or disinfection byproducts. Understanding them is important for a nurse can broadcast knowledge about such to a large number of people in addition to inventing effective means of curbing the problem. The most vulnerable groups of people to this contamination include developing fetuses, and children (infants) in their early stages since their bodies are still open to chemically-inflicted changes in their body systems. Such chemicals-turned-contaminants can alter the normal fetus development process resulting in abnormal births, or children born with some birth defects. Infants are not the only ones who face the said danger, but also people termed as immunocompromised. Immunocompromised people are those who have a weak or weakened immune system, usually caused by a serious ailment or one that occurs naturally. Natural immunodeficiency occurs when one attains the late or old age. At this time, they are exposed to many threatening pathogens and agents of ailment, and as such require having safe and pure drinking water available for them. The chemicals in the water can trigger old age, health complications related to the liver or kidneys since their systems cannot handle some chemical properties as young bodies would. Finally, it is important to note that pregnant women and old people are not the only ones who face the problem of being affected by DBP’s but also the young people. The only difference is that any ailment will take longer to manifest itself than it does in old people. What happens is that the toxicity piles up in one until it reaches levels, which then develop into a healthy condition. What this means is that the problem may not manifest it immediately, but takes some time before it does. According to Barlow (2004), a recent test was carried out by the University of Illinois on water supplied by municipal systems which revealed that treating water with chloramines led to the creation of a highly toxic DBP. Chloramines are compounds of chlorine and ammonia which combine to form Iodoacids. Iodoacids are highly toxic DBPs which have the ability to interfere with DNA structures. The findings were shocking because the EPA has in the recent past been encouraging people to treat water with chlorine-based disinfectants. The study showed that the resulting DBPs were harmful when present in mammalian cells, and could result in the formation of cancers, deform developing fetus, and hinder or affect normal child development. Cases such as these are the reason why every public nurse should know about the DBPs and find means of addressing the issue. Most municipal councils have devised means of dealing with this problem, of which most of them advise their consumers to further treat their water before consuming it. In short, they do not support the direct consumption of the water from the taps. However, this does not always work because the people’s cultures and systematic beliefs tell them that water supplied by the municipality is ready to drink, as such, no need to further treat it. This is dangerous in that while it is the municipal’s role to see to it that safe water is available, they cannot always guarantee one-hundred percent that the water did not encounter any unknown contamination on its way to the consumer. On the other note, it is still difficult to get people to understand the dangers of consuming for long water with traces of chemicals used in the process, byproducts of disinfectants, or radio nuclides which result of the UV curing that water is exposed to. People should understand that despite not showing immediate effect on the consumer, they pile up inside one’s body and later cause diseases that are as harmful as pathogens. Public health nurses have an understanding of all these concepts and as such, can be an incredible part of the changing process. They can organize public sensitization programs to educate the larger public on the said DBP issue in addition to avoiding practices which may result in contamination of public water systems. This is especially to those who live near water bodies, treatment plants, and those who run industries or farms. In addition, public health nurses can conduct research on water systems and upon finding aspects that require correction, share their findings with the concerned bodies such as the EPA. As if that is not enough, they should push to have mitigation policies established to address such. Collectively, a single public health nurse can be an advocate, educator, advisor, or policy maker in helping to address the said problem thus foster the credibility of municipal water systems as excellent suppliers of safe, ready to drink water. All in all, the entire blame should not be placed on the municipal water systems alone as they face challenges themselves, which might be the reason for some of the minor blunders that occur. Moreover, their performance is very good and it is only in a few situations when their work shows some flaws. One of the key challenges that the municipal water system and particularly in the water treatment context is sensitizing the consumers about the need of further treating their water upon delivery of municipal piping. Owing to the monstrous size of treatment plants, and the numerous processes that the water undergoes, there is likelihood that the water is not one-hundred percent pure, and may contain traces of contaminants. It is therefore important to further treat their water before consuming it using any of the available domestic treatment means. The problem is that the larger society believes that since the water is treated, then it is safe for direct consumption. The other challenge affects smaller public water supply systems is lack of adequate funds to run their activities. Lack of funds results in underdevelopment and underproduction in that they cannot afford advanced water treatment technologies when they emerge, thus cuts their capacities down. The problem with being small is that such plants cannot access sufficient funding even through loans as they are considered to have unsupportive assets or securities. In addition, they face outright opposition from consumers if they happen to adjust water rates to support expansion or effectiveness, further crippling their fix. This relates to the first challenge in that the consumers when informed that their upward revision of charges are meant to cater for better treatment, have no idea of what “better” means since to them all treated water is safe. Conclusion In summing up, one can tell from the above study that municipal water systems have more to them than just sending bills to clients. It is justified to think of their bills as bogus, but once one gets to understand the process that water undergoes before getting to us, then they would not have a reason to complain. The study also highlights the close bonds that exist between the municipality and the nursing fraternity. Working closely with the EPA, the nursing body understands too well the relationship between disease and water, thus can be of much help in controlling contamination of water. Again, nurses can help resolve the issue of sensitizing the public on the dangers of contaminating water sources, and also the danger of not re-treating their drinking water. However, it is evident that the two are working closely around the clock to ensure that America is free from waterborne ailments as was the case in ancient Philadelphia. References Barraqué, B. (2010). Urban water conflicts: UNESCO-IHP. London: Taylor & Francis. Boccaletti, G. (2013). Financing Water: How public-private partnerships can solve challenges. The Guardian. Retrieved on March 10, 2014 from http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/financing-water-public-private-partnerships Burlow, J. (2004, September 14). “Byproduct of Water-Disinfection Process found to be Highly Toxic,” News Bureau Illinois. Retrieved on March 10, 2014 from http://news.illinois.edu/news/04/0914water.html Cutler, D., & Miller, G. (2006). Water, Water, Everywhere: Municipal Finance and Water Supply in American Cities. The National Bureau of Economic Research. 153-182. Davis, H. A. (2008). Infrastructure finance: Trends and techniques. London: Euromoney Books. Hendricks, D. (2010). Fundamentals of Water Treatment Unit Processes: Physical, Chemical, and Biological. CRC Press. Philadelphia Water Department. (2014). Urban Water Cycle. Philadelphia Government. Retrieved on March 10, 2014 from http://www.phila.gov/water/urban_water_cycle.html Spellman, F., R. (2008). Handbook of Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations. CRC Press. Wang, W. (2010). Cool, Clear Water: The Fairmont Water Works. Retrieved on March 10, 2014 from http://pabook.libraries.psu.edu/palitmap/FairmountWW.html Read More