Toledo to Dispose of Biosolids Sludge on the Shores of Lake Erie Ohio
September 29, 2011 Leave a Comment
The following paragraph is taken from the U.S. EPA website
Nonpoint source pollution generally results from land runoff, precipitation, atmospheric deposition, drainage, seepage or hydrologic modification. The term “nonpoint source” is defined to mean any source of water pollution that does not meet the legal definition of “point source” in section 502(14) of the Clean Water Act.
The City of Toledo is debating whether to place a minimum of 40,000 tons of biosolids on a man-made island and mixing the sludge with harbor dredgings as part of a beneficial reuse program supported by many groups to mention just a few-The Lake Erie Partnership and the Toledo Port Authority.
The issue with disposing of biosolids on the Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) Site 3 located on the shores of Lake Erie is not the classification of treatment but the point / nonpoint source pollution run-off from biosolids. Downward movement of phosphorus from organic wastes is potentially significant in areas with shallow ground water (like a dredging island) and coarse-textured soils of low phosphorus-sorbing capacity (like dredgings).
The above video, Green Algae on Lake Erie, makes reference to wastewater treatment discharge as a major contributor of excess phosphorus that in turn feeds the algae blooms which have taken over the west end of Lake Erie in the past decade.
Let’s make informed decisions about the management of organic materials on the basis of which alternatives provide reasonable protection for our environment regardless of technologies. Keeping our waterways free from pollutants by properly disposing of biosolids in a responsible manner is our mission at N-Viro International Corporation.
Sound management of biosolids recycling demands a full understanding of the effects of phosphorus leaching and offsite seepage of nonpoint source pollution.
The current regulatory framework for the CDFs sets up an adversarial federal/state relationship when a federal standard determination does not meet state water quality criteria and needs mending. However, a better process is needed to help state and federal agencies synchronize protocols and data used to determine compliance with the same Clean Water Act provisions. Clearly, the water quality needs attention.
If there are conflicts regarding water quality what process is followed to implement alternative management options and which agency determines what is the best, cost effective alternative from an environmental standpoint?
Testing is simply a smart, risk averse, qualifier to ensure the quality of our air, water and land. Let’s see that it is implemented on the CDFs.
About nvirointernational
