LETTER — Biosolids and sludge aren’t the same thing
LETTER — I would like to take the opportunity to clear up some misconceptions around biosolids and how they are used throughout B.C. In B.C., biosolids can only be applied to the land when there is a benefit. Companies cannot apply biosolids to the land as simply a means of disposal.
Enviro Minister Mary Polak.
Biosolids are used as compost or fertilizer on land. The nutrients in the biosolids make soils healthier, similar to animal manure.
In B.C., “biosolids” and “sludge” do not mean the same thing, as regulations do not allow the land application of sludge. Sludge is material generated during the wastewater treatment process before any beneficial use is met. Biosolids are sufficiently treated to reduce odours and harmful substances, stabilized, and tested to ensure treatment requirements and quality criteria are met. Biosolids not used as fertilizer are sent to a landfill, contributing to methane production, increased greenhouse gases and increased costs to landfills.
Regulation of biosolids falls under the Organic Matter Recycling Regulation, which is designed to protect human health and the environment. Biosolids have been applied safely to a variety of locations in the Nicola Valley – and around the province – for more than a decade.
MARY POLAK
Minister of Environment
Editor’s note: The above letter was originally published in the North Shore News.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
It’s unfortunate to see Caroline Snyder cited by Don Vincent as an expert. Doing so just clouds the picture. Having known Dr. Snyder, who lives here in New Hampshire, for nearly 20 years, I just want to clarify the record.
But first, I want to note that, being from far away, I know little about the situation in the Nicola Valley. I understand that odors are a concern, and we involved in management of wastewater solids struggle with odor management – it’s part of the nature of the material. But that is not an excuse; the fact is, strong and lasting malodor is not something a community should have to put up with. At the same time, recycling of biosolids to soils is beneficial to society. Hopefully, differences there can be worked out, and compromise reached.
Now about Dr. Snyder. She has been a vocal opponent to the use of biosolids – treated sewage sludge – on soils since the 1990s. She has a lifelong interest in the environment, but little formal scientific training. She has done no primary research in the area of biosolids, soil science, chemistry, microbiology, or any other pertinent scientific field. Her PhD is in Germanic Languages and Literature from Radcliffe (now part of Harvard). During her academic career, she taught mostly language and literature – and one introductory environmental science course – in the College of Liberal Arts, a small part of the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York state. Her arguments against use of biosolids on soils rely on – have always relied on – a relatively small number of published research papers, quoted to meet her needs. She is welcome to her opinions, but they are not supported by the broad body of scientific research.
In contrast to what Dr. Snyder cites, there are thousands of published papers on the topic of biosolids application to soils, and two reviews by the U. S. National Academy of Sciences. These have yielded a strong majority opinion in the scientific and public policy arenas that biosolids applied to land in accordance with regulations is a safe and beneficial practice that helps communities deal with a material that must be managed (wastewater exists and must be managed).
In addition, think about it: if biosolids were as unsafe as Dr. Snyder purports, why wouldn’t the many thousands of wastewater treatment operators, who directly manage the material daily, be significantly impacted negatively? Why wouldn’t there be notable, measured impacts on the thousands of hectares of land to which biosolids have been applied, in many cases annually for 20 years or more? See more about biosolids, including the science (at lower right) at http://www.nebiosolids.org/about-biosolids/
Every U. S. state allows use of biosolids on soils. About 60% of the wastewater sludge produced in the U. S. is recycled to soils as biosolids. The strong, consensus policy of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME)(http://www.ccme.ca/en/resources/waste/biosolids.html) is to encourage the recycling of biosolids to soils, because of the demonstrated environmental benefits.
Communities in BC join other communities across Canada in recycling their wastewater solids (“sludge”) as biosolids: Halifax, Charlottetown, Fredericton, Moncton, Saguenay, Sherbrooke, (Quebec City is moving from incineration to recycling), Toronto, Hamilton, and a total of 80% of Ontario municipalities, Winnipeg, Regina, Calgary, Banff – and Ottawa. In the U.S., the list includes Washington DC, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle.
We welcome your interest and questions about biosolids management. There is also excellent information about biosolids at http://www.nwbiosolids.org. And I recommend this video: http://www.weao.org/biosolids-video
Ned Beecher, Executive Director
North East Biosolids and Residuals Association (NEBRA)
nebiosolids.org
LikeLike
Dr. Snyder does rely heavily on the top soil scientists from Cornell University, and they have found that land application of biosolids to be an unsafe practice. Add to this an extensive (and more recent) research undertaken by the German government (2013) that came to the same conclusion – it is simply far too risky to continue this practice – and advocated incineration (with modern filtration) as a much more environmentally viable option. We must employ a precautionary principle here – with both human health and the environment in jeopardy. Testing is woefully inadequate for such a potentially dangerous practice.
LikeLike
. We have looked at other countries, and more recent independent studies. What we find is very troubling indeed. The dangers fall into a number of categories, including, Hormones and Synthetic Hormones, Prion Contamination, Toxin Contamination (heavy metals and toxic organic chemicals), and so-called Emerging Substances of Concern – ESOCs – (microbial, organic and inorganic contaminants, pharmaceuticals and personal care products (amongst a number of ESOCs) ). They are all worrying and all demand far more study. You folks in government ignore these findings at your peril. Below is a sample of such science which clearly backs our claim that we need to stop this land application of toxic sewer sludge until we are entirely clear as to what we are dealing with. We need to be cautious with Mother Earth. We understand that you see this dispersal as a cheap way to deal with big-city sludge, but frankly, we are the ones taking all the risks for this decision. This burden you put on rural areas is unfair, unhealthy and unsustainable. It is time you reconsidered this method of dealing with waste.
Some of the new independent studies you should be taking seriously –
“A case for caution re-visited” Harrison and McBride, Cornell, 2008/9. A compendium of some 65 studies http://cwmi.css.cornell.edu/case.pdf These represent some of the finest soil scientists in the world – and they simply see too many issues/problems/worries with land application of biosolids.
A recent in-depth German study (2013) clearly states that risks are too high for land application and urges an end to this practice as soon as possible. https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/files/medien/378/publikationen/sewage_sludge_management_in_germany.pdf
A new study (2012) from Scientists at the University of Aberdeen “studying sheep maintained on pastures fertilized with sewage sludge … found a high incidence of abnormalities in the animals.” As the article states, “It is our opinion that all spreading of sewage sludges, humanure and biosolids on agricultural land in the UK should be stopped until it is PROVED to be safe” http://www.wte-ltd.co.uk/sewage_sludge_biosolids.html
“National Toxics Network of Australia” media release from May, 2015 recommends – “Stop the use of biosolids as fertiliser pending further investigation of pharmaceutical contaminants” see full article at –
Click to access NTN-Media-release-Pharmaceutical-pollution-report-2015-05-31.pdf
A very good piece of objective journalism from The Guardian a few years ago, clearly maps out the issues with land application of biosolids –
“Switzerland – which used to land-apply 40% of its sludge – has banned the practice because of fears from farmers that it was harming their soil. The Netherlands has banned agricultural use of sludge, and national farmers’ associations in France, Germany, Sweden, Luxembourg and Finland are against it, partly because of concerns about organic contaminants such as PCBs and brominated flame retardants (linked to liver and neurodevelopmental toxicity and hormone disruption), which some research has shown persist in sludge.” Please read the whole article at –
http://www.theguardian.com/environ…/…/aug/29/waste.recycling
A disturbing study from 2011, “Survival of infectious prions in Class B biosolids.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21391030
An article in the highly respected Nature Journal – “Prions’ great escape”
http://www.nature.com/n…/2008/080701/full/news.2008.926.html
A recent and worrying study from 2012 – “Persistence of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy infectious agent in sewage”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/…/article/pii/S0013935112001934
In light of the recent win (against the tobacco industry) by the class action suit in Quebec (of some 12 billion dollars in damages) I believe it behooves both the sludge industry, and the government endorsing it, to be aware of the direction that recent independent science is pointing, and consider carefully if they (both industry & government) too are not opening themselves up to liability. The knowledge is out there, and denial will not be a protection from future prosecution.
What our Provincial and Federal Governments have neglected to take into consideration is that they have agreed to act in environmental issues (like the one we are facing) with the Precautionary Principle in mind. The precautionary principle denotes a duty to prevent harm, when it is within their power to do so, even when all the evidence is not in. This principle has been codified in several international treaties to which Canada is a signatory.
It is time to reconsider this dubious practice of land application of biosolids. There are alternatives (see recent clean incineration methods in Denmark and Germany that actually return energy to the grid) that may have an initial cost for the government to implement, but future medical costs and environmental clean-up costs will surely amount to much more in the long-term.
LikeLike
This woman is clearly not informed on this issue and should not comment on things she is not well versed in. It really makes her look like a fool to release something like this. She needs a new media manager, no one in their right mind would allow her to release this!
LikeLike
I was just talking to someone just West of the biosolid drop in the fields. She said the smell was so horrific, her nose was burning and could hardly breathe. So Mary Polak, please do not misinform the public unless u have sat near these piles of s…… wastes and then u will have greater appreciation of the ugly smell that comes off these wastes.
LikeLike
I’d like to see her reaction if it’s dumped onto her property. Then hear her touting the benefits of biosolids!
LikeLike
Before writing or uttering another word on the subject of bio-solids, it would behoove Minister Polak to read up on the subject. There exists a plethora of research on the practice of using bio-solids as fertilizer, most of which is conclusively damning in nature. Minister Polak has clearly not availed herself of any of these findings, or she has chosen to ignore them, just as she is ignoring the health and well-being of the people and land of the Nicola Valley.
LikeLike
The Minister of Environment has either not read the OMRR Guidelines or does not understand them. A number of comments in her article contradict the OMRR Guidelines of the Government. This product is being spread onto land that has very green natural grasslands where it is not needed. There is a lot of money to be made by people who choose to spread this product for the sole purpose of money gain. There is more money received than the property value used over a period of time….Who wouldn’t do it if money was important to you. One must care about the environment before they would NOT do this. Maybe Government people should read the TIME mag. article on Alzheimer’s…..Dr. Stanley Prusiner (Nobel Prize Winner) says we are dumping prions into our food and water supplies with foolish sewage management practices. He states it is ludicrous to think that treated sewage water or biosolids are prion-free. He has been given his award on the study Prions/Neurological Disease Becoming The Leading Cause Of Death…..Read The Article!
LikeLike
Does medical waste, micro beads and micro-fibres end up in this bio-solid mix ?What do flash floods or extreme weather do to this disposal method ? Whats in that moop ?
LikeLike
shes not very informed is she, paid to say what she is told. Has no real clue what its all about…. not rocket science…. so they should spread these BIOSOLIDS because they are so safe, on the lands from which city they come from, rather than on trucking them out of the area, correct. Spread them all over Vancouver Island, as they are very safe. Spread them all in the in the farmlands in the fraser valley. Spread them in the Kelowna, Westbank, Vernon farmlands from those city that produce the safe BIOSOLIDS, so rich in nutrients, so why send all this great stuff to small towns. We take care of our own, so should they… the Nicola region has never suffered from nutrient poor lands, everything is just fine here, thank you very much.
LikeLike
On the issue of Biosolids one can do no better than to quote two of the leading authorities-
Professor Snyder (Harvard PhD)
“Biosolids applied to land is probably the most pollutant-rich material generated in the 21st century. It contains hazardous industrial waste, pharmaceuticals, carcinogens, neurotoxins, solvents, and a host of other chemicals , metals, and superbugs. Serious life-threatening illnesses, animal deaths, polluted wells, permanently poisoned soil all have been linked to this unsafe practice. Biosolids regulations are full of loopholes. The government agencies that are supposed to protect human health and the environment have been captured by the industries and cities who profit from this convenient method of sludge disposal. No credible science supports the practice of spreading toxics-containing waste on the land where we graze our animals or grow our food. A growing body of credible peer reviewed science indicates that the land cannot clean up biosolids. Instead toxic and persistent industrial pollutants accumulate in the soil, leach into groundwater, or are picked up by plants.”
Jim Poushinsky (Ottawa) – “The spreading of toxic and pathogenic sewage biosolids on agricultural lands and hence into the food chain and environment is the best kept secret of our time. It is a secret because the sewage spreading lobby of government and industry knows full well that if this becomes common knowledge the people will not stand for it and insist it be stopped. “
LikeLike
You hit that nail right on the head Don.
LikeLike
You can’t even eat anything grown in this crap for a least 3 years after it has been applied. Needless to say, I’ll bet they would do a hell of a lot more to make it safe if they couldn’t ship to anywhere that is ” out of sight, out of mind “.
LikeLike
Its too bad that the concern for the environment that the government is showing is not expanded even further by not hauling their biosolids from Vancouver to Kamloops and keeping them down there. That way the environment could be spared from all those trucks and their diesel fumes and wear and tear of the highways. And all those blueberry fields would benefit as well. Same for Kelowna, they could keep all the benefits of their biosolids as well instead of hauling them to Merrit.
LikeLike