water quality and health from source to tap

Water Quality and Healthfrom Source to Tap

Professor Joan RoseMichigan State University

WATER QUALITY AND HEALTHFROM SOURCE TO TAP

Professor Joan B. [email protected]

Homer Nowlin Chair

© 2019 Prof Joan Rose | Michigan State University

How safe is your water?(at the source and at the tap)

How are you solving current problems and challenges?

Is there aWATER CRISIS BREWING?


Water Quality Impacts on Health

The Issues:• Aging infrastructure: New materialsremoving lead, preventing leaking,reducing water retention times.• Climate change: quantity and quality challenges• Source water change: Land‐use changes, New water sources (desalination,

reuse); pollution of current source; overall water quality change (toxic algae blooms)

• Emerging/ Re‐emerging hazards (chemical and biological) e.g. Legionella. Chronic outcomes. Antibiotic resistance.

• Disinfection: moving disinfection from an art to a science (inactivation studies, sensors, stability, balancing DBPs)

• Social Structures: Changes in vulnerable and sensitive populations, changes in community structure (access to wholesome food; access to education).

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Source Waters and the Connection to Water Quality and Human Health

WATER

Oceans

StreamsRiversFOOD

Produce

PorkFish

Poultry

Beef

HUMAN HEALTHElderly Children

Immuno-compromised

Agricultural Runoff

HandlingPreparation

Consumption

Irrigation

Fertilization

Animal & Human Feces

Recreational& Drinking

Water

Lakes

GroundWater

HealthCare

The global population has reached 7 billion, and meat consumption rates worldwide have outpaced population growth.

However animal waste now contributes more pollution to waters of the world.

The numbers of cattle, sheep, pigs and chickens are estimated at 1.4, 1, 0.9 and 21 billion, respectively (FAO http://www.fao.org/docrep).

On average, animals and humans generate 62 and 10 billion kg of excreta per day, respectively (FAOSTAT).

The amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, and energy that could be recovered from these excreta are approximately 215 million kg, 143 million kg, and 59,998 tera‐Joule, respectively, and represent a large amount of nutrient‐rich resources (http://www.fao.org/docrep/004/x6518e/x6518e01.htm).


E coli 0157H7 Outbreak Linked with Romaine Lettuce contaminated irrigation water: Yuma AZ


Waterborne pathogens threaten human health in the Great Lakes

Campylobacter, Arcobacter, Giardia

Legionella

Cryptosporidium

Toxic Algal blooms

Norovirus

E.Coli 0157H7 and

Campylobacter

A sample glass of Lake Erie water is photographed near the Toledo water intake crib in Lake Erie. (Haraz

N. Ghanbari/Associated Press)

Ohio blames groundwater for Lake Erie island outbreakTuesday, February 22, 2005

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Walkerton, Canada, 2000Campylobacter, E.coli 0157

2000 ill, 7 deaths, 30 cases hemolytic uremic

syndrome

In August 2016, more than one‐third of the 14,000 residents of the community of Havelock North in New Zealand were sickened with gastrointestinal illness after drinking untreated groundwater contaminated. It was New Zealand’s largest drinking water outbreak in recorded history. Other recent reports have noted that many people, especially the elderly, continue to suffer physically and have not fully recovered from the outbreak.1 The regional cost of the outbreak now exceeds $2.7 million in New Zealand dollars.

Havelock, New Zealand 2016

Campylobacter~4600 ill, 3 deaths

3‐D computer‐generated image of Campylobacter based upon scanning electron micrographic imagery Courtesy of CDC/James Archer


Hazard ID

Dose Response Exposure

Characterization

Management

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES RISK ASSESSMENT PARADIGM

SCIENCE AND DECISIONS: Advancing Risk Assessment, (2009)Committee on Improving Risk Analysis Approaches Used by the EPANATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIESTHE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS, DC. www.nap.edu


RISK FRAMEWORKS FOR DEFINING SAFE WATER

The Hazards and impacts

The Dose‐responseThe Exposure

Risk Characterization

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Safety is at the intersection of our scientific knowledge, our ability to control risks and societal engagement all influenced by technology

Knowledge Control

s

Societal Engagement Safe


Why knowledge matters

• “The Fix” for water problems is long-term and complex

• Need to move political will

• Need evidence and science-based knowledge to make continual progress

• Need better diagnostic tools to provide information to address health risks


How do we solve the water pollution problems and protect water quality?

TECHNOLOGY

ASSESSMENT

IMPROVED KNOWLEDGE & DECISION MAKING


Growth Based Methods: Common Fecal Indicator Organisms for measuring water quality

Fecal coliforms

Agar and coloniesE.coli

MPN and coloniesTotal coliforms MPN

Filtering or processing 100 ml water samples


Innovative Water Technology Water Genomics and Safety

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR):

Small amount of DNA amplified in a thermal cycler

Amplified products are measured at the end point of amplification by agarose gel electrophoresis

Quantitative PCR (qPCR):

Amplified PCR products are detected real‐time during the early phases of the reaction.

15© 2019 Prof Joan Rose | Michigan State University

Sources of E.coli, Fecal Pollution and Pathogens

Agricultural run‐off

Animal farming operations

Waste water/Sewage treatment Septic systems

Combined Sewer Overflow

Wildlife

Microbial Source Tracking

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Water Diagnostics using digital droplet polymerase chain reaction

• B.theta for human sewage

• M2 bovine marker

• > 10,000 tests (droplets) per well

Sewage Positive

Cow manure Positive

Positive for both genes

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Water quality of the source

64 River systems

Baseflow (October 2010)Spring thaw (March 2011)Early summer rain (June 2011)

84% Lower Peninsula drainage area In Stream Conditions:• River discharge (ADCP and USGS)• Temperature • Physical chemistry (pH and specific

conductance)Chemistry and Nutrients:• Nutrients (N, P, TN, TP, TDN, TDP,

SRP)• Ions (Na, Ca, Mg, Cl, K, NO3, SO4,

NH3)• Dissolved organic carbon• Alkalinity• Stable isotopes (δH2 and δO18)Algae and Chlorophyll:• Chlorophyll a• Epiphytic algae (hard and soft

substrate)

• B. theta– Sensitivity: 80 to 100%– Specificity: 100%

• CowM2– Sensitivity: 100%– Specificity: >95%

• Pig2Bac– Sensitivity: 100%– Specificity: 99%

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

CAFOs in 2017:

• Approximately 21M animals confined in 272 animal farms in Michigan

• Producing approximately 3.3 billion gallons of manure, urine, and other liquid wastes per year

Source: USDA, 2017, https://www.sierraclub.org/michigan/cafo‐map, and https://nocafos.org/

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)

https://www.sierraclub.org/michigan/cafo‐map

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Discharges from Septic Tanks and Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Luscz EC, Kendall AD, Hyndman DW (2015) High resolution spatially explicit nutrient source models for the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. J Great Lakes Res 41(2):618–229.

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

The distribution of the human sewage marker Bacteroides

• Increasing B. theta related to more septic tanks

• More E.coli related to more total phosphorous and increasing stream temperature

Significant Knowledge Gaps Exist for Septics

< 4.6

4.6 - 4.9

4.9 - 5.2

5.2 - 5.6

> 5.6

B. theta concentrations(Log CE/100 ml)

²0 60 12030 Kilometers

< 0.8

0.8 - 1.4

1.4 - 2.37

2.37 - 2.9

> 2.9

E. coli concentrations(Log MPN/100 ml)

E.coli © 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

BovinePorcine

Low flow

Spring melt

Summer rain

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Temporal and Spatial Resolution toward Solutions

5 Watersheds across Michigan– Little Pigeon (1) 14km2

– Sandy Creek (2) 82km2

– Macatawa (4) 292km2

– Kawkawlin (3) 582km2

– River Raisin (7) 2683km2

• Sampling – April – August 2017– Winter Baseflow– Spring Snow melt

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Little Pigeon Watershed• Area: 14 km2

• 1 Sampling Site • Land Cover (2011)

– 18.9% Urban– 16.4% Agricultural– 41.9% Forest– 16.3% Wetland

Sandy Creek Watershed

• Area: 82km2

• 2 Sampling Sites• Land use (2011)

– 82% Urban– 28.2% Agricultural– 10.6% Forest– 2.7% Wetland


Macatawa Watershed• Area: 292km2

• Land Use– 23.5% Urban– 67.8% Agricultural– 4.0% Forest– 3.1% Wetland

Kawkawlin Watershed

• Area: 582km2

• Land Cover (North & South Branches)– 2.6 % & 12.6% Urban– 43.1% & 73.3% Agricultural– 40.2% & 7.5% Forest– 7.9% & 1.6% Wetland

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

River Raisin Watershed

• 7 Sampling Sites• Area: 2683 km2

• Land Use– 10.8% Urban– 67.4% Agricultural– 11.1% Forest– 8.3% Wetland


Apr

il 20

17M

ay 2

017

June

201

7Ju

ly 2

017

Aug

ust 2

017

Nov

embe

r 201

7M

arch

201

8M

ay 2

018

RR1RR2RR3RR4RR5RR6RR7SC1SC2

LPR1MAC1MAC2MAC3MAC4KAW1KAW2KAW3

CowM2 Log10 GC/100mL

2.6

2.8

3.0

3.2

3.4


Findings and QuestionsTemporal clusters• Rain driven• Legacy inputs (eg N 20 year legacy via ground water, pathogens 1 year legacy?)• Spring (and Fall) application of K, P, N fertilizers and manure(what about biosolids or septage?)• Bigger Policies how they impact the land and water No application on

frozen ground

Spatial clusters– Septic tanks /ground water pollution – Tillage /No Tillage– Tile drains ‐Types (Presence/absence)– Buffers– Wetlands as reservoirs


Critical Infrastructure Sectorshttps://www.dhs.gov/critical-infrastructure-sectors

There are 16 critical infrastructure sectors whose assets, systems, and networks, whether physical or virtual, are considered so vital to the United States that their incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating effect on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination thereof.

Water and WastewaterTransportation

Information Technology Energy Food and Agriculture

Health Care and Public Health

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

The public believes the Safe Drinking Water Act protects water at the tap


Etiology of 928 drinking water–associated outbreaks, by year —U.S. (1971–2014)

• 2013–2014, 42 drinking water–associated outbreaks were reported

1006 cases of illness, 124 hospitalizations, and 13 deaths• Legionella was responsible for 57% of outbreaks and 13% of illnesses

• Most commonly identified deficiencies leading to drinking water–associated outbreaks were Legionellain building plumbing systems (66%) and untreated groundwater (13%)


New Challenges: Pathogens in the Premise PlumbingPathogen Disease(s) Mode of exposure

Legionella pneumophila Legionnaires’ Disease (pneumonia) / Pontiac fever in children

Inhalation or aspiration

Pseudomonas aeruginosa Urinary tract infections, respiratory infections, dermatitis, soft tissue infections, bacteremia, bone and joint infections, GI infections

Wound infection, inhalation

Mycobacterium avium Pulmonary disease, cervical lymphadenitis (children)

Inhalation or aspiration

Acanthamoeba Acanthamoeba keratitis Wound infection

Naegleria fowleri Primary amoebic meningoencephalitis

Nasal aspiration


Public health hospitalization costs associated with US drinking water*

• CDC estimates drinking water disease costs > $970 m/yr– Legionnaires’ disease, otitis externa, and non‐tuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) account for

>40 000 hospitalizations/yearDisease Annual costs

Cryptosporidiosis $46M

Giardiasis $34M

Legionnaires’ disease $434M

NTM infection/Pulmonary $426M/ $195M

*Collier et al. (2012) Epi Inf 140(11): 2003‐13

36


Flint Michigan a Perfect Storm• The Flint plant was completed in 1954.• Population in Flint peaked in 1960 at ~200,000• Flint has purchased water from Detroit Water and

Sewage Department (DWSD) since 1967 from Lake Huron and treated at the Fort Gratiot plant

• Population now <100,000; Water usage is down by 2/3

• Vulnerable, low‐income residents • Older houses with lead services lines and/or

plumbing (estimated at 15,000)• Some distribution mains thought to be lead

Slide provided by Dr. Susan MastenEnvironmental EngineeringMichigan State University © 2019 Prof Joan Rose | Michigan State University

Timeline• July 2011 Report on the evaluation of the Flint River as a long‐term source of drinking water issued

• April 9, 2014 MDEQ approves permit• April 25, 2014 Flint River changeover ceremony• April 30, 2014 DWSD Water line closed• June 2014 Complaints regarding water quality begin (smell, taste, discoloration)

• August 14, 2014 Flint water tests positive for E coli. Boil water advisories issued two days later. Problems continue with three boil water advisory notices issued in a 22‐day span in summer

Slide provided by Dr. Susan Masten, Environmental Engineering, Michigan State University

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Timeline

• November 2, 2014 City increases hydrant flushing to address red water concerns

• December 16, 2014 City receives official violation notice from DEQ for violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act for total trihalomethanes

• June 2015 Second violation of D/DBP Rule

• Late July 2015 Flint installs a granular activated carbon filter to control THMs by removing organic matter

Steve Carmody/Michigan Radio

www.Flintwaterstudy.org

Slide provided by Dr. Susan Masten,Environmental Engineering, Michigan State University

© 2019 P

rof Joan Rose | M

ichigan State U

niversity

Timeline

• October 16, 2015 Flint switches back to “Detroit” water which comes from Lake Huron

• December 9, 2015 Flint starts adding additional phosphate to increase the concentration from 1 to 2.5 mg/L for corrosion control

http://flintwaterstudy.org/page/2/

Slide provided by Dr. Susan MastenEnvironmental EngineeringMichigan State University


Legionnaire’ Disease: 87 cases, 10 deaths

(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/flint‐water‐legionnaires‐lead‐crisis_us_569d09d6e4b0ce4964252c33)© 2019 Prof Joan Rose | Michigan State University

MSU Building WQ Objectives• Goal: To evaluate the water quality of academic buildings which have varying water residence times, use and chlorine residual.

• Sub‐objectives include: 1. Examine bacteriological water quality associated with the

“freshness” and use of water in buildings2. Examine the presence of Legionella, L. pneumophila and L.p

Serogroup 1. Amoeba3. Evaluate composite sampling 10L samples; 4. Evaluate the role of taps on water quality


Monitoring and Control?• Exposure needs to be assessed• Legionella sp, Lp,Lpsg1 sampling needs to undertaken in the distribution system in the premise plumbing, hospitals and susceptible areas (water heaters, shower heads, taps) fountains and homes

• How, why and where to L.p (sg1?) bloom?• What is the role of water quality, nutrients, iron, temperature, amoeba.

• What about other premise plumbing pathogens?


Using risk analysis what is the goal for premise plumbing, goal at the tap?

Development of treatment standards for drinking water treatment to remove pathogens from water

4 logs viruses

2 to 3 logs protozoa

5 to 6 logs bacteria

Is 10‐4 the correct goal?


•WHAT IS THE ROLE OF WATER INDUSTRY?

•WHO WILL TAKE A LEADERSHIP ROLE?


How safe is your water?(at the source and at the tap)

How are you solving current problems and challenges?

Is there aWATER CRISIS BREWING?


Figure 1. Conceptual diagram showing how the IN‐Water Network connects people working within the One Water Approach (based on US Water Alliance 2016).


Water quality diagnosticsContaminant databases

Environmental Sources and Fate

Innovative Technology

Risk & Communication

Target organisms Genetic variation Detection technologies

Surface water, groundwater, distribution system Disinfection/deactivationModeling for decision support system

Risk assessment and management

Flexible control technologies (physical and temporal scales)

Water Safety


Acknowledgements

• Rose Lab Group• Joan B. Rose• Matthew Flood• Jean Pierre

Nshimyimana• Rebecca Ives• Sherry Martin• Anthony Kendall• David Hyndman

Research Funded by the Michigan Corn Growers Association and MSU’s Project Green

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Michigan Corn Marketing Program


water quality and health from source to tap

Documents