Page 6 - the NOISE August 2012
P. 6

TOP 8 IMAGES: At Flagstaff’s Continental Country Club, an observer will find 60-70% of native trees on the greens have few cones, browning limbs, and limited top foliage; BOTTOM 2 IMAGES: A stand of juniper trees along Highway 89A — the tree on the right & closeup are in direct contact with reclaimed wastewater.
Upon her twelve-week research, Ms. Schuch wrote: “The root zone so- lution of plants under the reclaimed water regime started to accumulate Sodium and Chlorine, and Bicarbonate and Ethylene bicarbonate started to reach levels where problems in salt sensitive plants might be expected. Sulfuric Acid Recovery also increased to levels that suggest possible So- dium problems.”
When NAU Chemistry Chair Marin Robinson was asked if she would re- view Ms. Schuch’s study, she replied: “I don’t have time for studies to come in off the street.” Assured the study came from a colleague at U of A, she responded:“Thenhavethemansweryourquestions. Ibelieveinreclaimed wastewater. I would probably give you false information.”
Senior Chemist John Wettaw, also of Northern Arizona University, when asked why Ms. Schuch’s study hadn’t been corroborated or reviewed by
6 • AUGUST 2012 • the NOISE arts & news magazine • thenoise.us
ADEQ’s mission statement is “to protect public health and the environment in Arizona,” and offers rewards — such as reduced inspection frequency, advance notice of enforcement, discretion for “non-significant violations,” public recognition, permit flexibility (where possible), reduction in reporting requirements (also where possible) and the cincher: “Request Your Own Facility Specific Benefits” (considered on a case-by-case basis) for businesses that are “environmental stewards” in a
program called “Performance Track.”
At its core, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality is the
state equivalent of the Environmental Protection Agency, as it is charged with issuing permits, approvals, and certifications for any entity which “dis- charges into the air, water, and soil.” On its website, it says it collects air, water, and soil samples for laboratory analyses, and its “staff interprets data from field research” to “draw conclusions about environmental indicators.”
Being the selector of data, the processor of finds, the issuer of terms, and the arbiter of compliance is a tall order for an arm of state government nei- ther so-funded nor accountable to the public. Instead, it receives marching orders from the Governor’s Regulatory Review Council, all of whose seven members are appointed by the governor. The two, statutorily assigned for distinctly different ends and means, are fused as one over-arching give-in for the continuation of profit building in this state, as Governor Jan Brewer’s running platform indicates.
Notwithstanding, ADEQ senior hydrologist, Charles Graff of the Wa- ter Quality Division claimed ignorance of a University of Arizona study entitled Impact of Drought on Management of Salt Sensitive Plants with Re- claimed Water — submitted by senior plant scientist Ursula Schuch for re- view in 2005 — and its conclusions that reclaimed wastewater has terminal effects on native plants.
In a written request and subsequent telephone interview last month, Mr. Graff was neither able to supply a contradicting study nor standards and methods used by ADEQ to classify A+ or B+ wastewater. He was also un- able to provide the elemental chemical composition of reclaimed wastewa- ter found in Flagstaff and Sedona. He maintained ADEQ bases its determi- nation of water quality on the number of filtrations a wastewater treatment plant utilizes and its tested pathogens, or bacteria level — which are moni- tored not by ADEQ, but by the facility itself. “It’s determined by the plant’s treatment capability,” explained Mr. Graff.
In essence, ADEQ grades the treatment plant, not the quality of wa- ter. And there remains no refuting scientific evidence to Ms. Schuch’s find- ings. It has been 30 days since this writer submitted the report officially to Mr. Graff for review, and despite a brief reply of “I will get back to you” and a personal visit to his office in Phoenix, no statement has come forth.
But every home gardener knows, if you put too much nitrogen in the soil, you get burns. You mix too much banana peel, or coffee grounds, or eggshell, or ash, and you get maybe not the most optimal of growth, as you would with plain old rainwater and good healthy soil. And you certainly never mix heavy salts in your watering can.
Reclaimed wastewater, however is doing just that. With so many bonds of sodium — whose molecules really love to affiliate, creating a bunch of different salts — seeping further into the ground and up into the roots and eventual leaf system of a native plant, a juniper tree or a ponderosa suf- focates from the ground up because its cells are clogged, and it can’t get enough of that juicy hydrogen oxygen mix it requires to keep growing.
Irrigating native trees with reclaimed wastewater could be compared to forcefeeding a man fastfood every day; arteries are made to only hold so much salt. Even Mr. Graff was able to admit: “There have been instances down here in the Valley, at golf courses in particular, where a lot of the re- claimed water goes, where they’ve had some burning of their turf, so it’s become an issue because of the high salinity of the water.”
Ms. Schuch’s study of Tuscon reclaimed water — the only such Ari- zona water study to date — finds Phosphorus at a twenty-one thousand (21,000%) percent increase when compared to ADEQ-defined “potable wa- ter,” and potable water already has significant increases when compared to rainwater. Ms. Schuch’s study found these increases:
46% Nitrogen (N) 67% Calcium (Ca) 712% Sulfur (S) 558% Chlorine (Cl) 72% Bicarbonate
500% Potassium (K)
550% Magnesium (Mg)
417% Sodium (Na)
733% Boron (B)
233% Ethylene carbonate (EC) 245% Sulfuric Acid Recovery (SAR)


































































































   4   5   6   7   8