Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiChromium 6 Still Threatens California's Drinking Water
Polluters who contaminate drinking water and make people sick shouldn't get off easy. That has been the focus of my work for two decades, and I'm not planning to stop now.
My work focused the attention of the world on a carcinogen called hexavalent chromium (hex chrome). In 1996, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. - a multibillion-dollar corporation - paid $333 million in damages to the people of Hinkley for contaminating their drinking water and covering up the problem for decades while people got sick and died. This victory was immortalized in film. But the story doesn't end there.
More than 500 California communities and 30 million state residents drank water contaminated with hexavalent chromium at levels above safe levels between 1998 and 2003. Hex chrome has been detected in nearly 60 percent of the drinking water sources sampled in California.
These problems are especially widespread in the Central Valley and the Inland Empire. The PG&E-Kettleman case settled in 2006 for $335 million. Another PG&E site in Topock affected the Colorado River - a drinking water source for millions. In Burbank, contamination by Lockheed Martin affected thousands, and in Riverside, TXI Corp's cement kiln contaminated the soil. Even Disney is responsible for chromium contamination in the San Fernando Valley.
Communities all over the United States and around the world have been poisoned by this chemical. I am currently working on a case in Midland, Texas, with enormous levels of hexavalent chromium in well water. Chromium polluters include a Who's Who of major corporations. It doesn't take a genius to know that these polluters don't want people to realize the extent of the problem, since they'd be on the hook for an expensive cleanup.
So it doesn't surprise me that five years after California regulatory agencies were required by law to set an up-to-date enforceable standard for hex chrome in drinking water, consumers are still not protected. I've fought these powerful interests for years, and I know firsthand how good they are at delay tactics.
The good news is that Cal-EPA's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment - the public health agency that the governor tried unsuccessfully to eliminate in the last budget cycle - has just come out with a proposed drinking water level that would protect Californians.
The new assessment uses research from the National Toxicology Program to identify the levels of hex chrome that cause cancer and then calculates a safe level for vulnerable populations including children. There was a public meeting in Oakland last week to accept comments on this proposal; written public input is welcome until Nov. 2.
I read through the 140-page Cal-EPA document with mixed feelings. On the one hand I felt vindicated, but I also felt saddened. The National Toxicology Program concluded in a 2007 study that hexavalent chromium is considered carcinogenic not only by inhalation but by ingestion. Gosh, who knew? Maybe if someone had believed all these people in Hinkley many years ago, many more lives would have been saved.
I was saddened by the descriptions of liver and kidney degeneration, blood abnormalities including anemia, testicular damage, infertility, miscarriage, fetal toxicity, chromosomal abnormalities and a litany of cancers. The clinical descriptions in the Cal-EPA document weren't abstract to me - they brought back the names and faces of people who I know who have lived and died with these illnesses.
Roberta Walker, the original client in the movie, was poisoned by Chromium 6. PG&E recently tested her new well at her new home and found levels of hexavalent chromium at 1.26 parts per billion, well over the proposed level of 0.06 ppb.
I congratulate the hard work of attorneys who fought on behalf of those poisoned and I applaud agencies and scientists for overseeing, setting and hopefully enforcing stricter standards. My fight for the people of Hinkley isn't over. To bring this dark chapter of history to a close, California must adopt a legally enforceable and truly health-protective standard for hex chrome in drinking water.
I cannot protect every contaminated community, but if we have a uniform standard, I will rest easier knowing that people won't be unknowingly drinking this dangerous substance. This chemical is a serious problem and I am glad it is being addressed. California has always led the way in setting standards that other states follow. We need to make prevention the goal of the future.
13 Comments so far
Show AllWhen I was in junior high school in the mid-1950s I was a "science fiction" nut, reading anything I could get my hands on (my introduction to "literature" including "1984"). I recall one short story I consider relevant here.
Humans had created a huge hollow orb in outer space that allegedly needed maintenance. One guy was hired to go in each night and spend his time using a wrench to loosen some bolts. Another guy was hired each day to spend all his time tightening the bolts. One of them dropped his wrench into the guts of the orb and that sort of ended the story.
To me that is a parable of the U.S. economy. We have corporations poisoning our environment and ourselves, we have corporations profiting from alleviating the illness caused by (not always) other corporations, we have corporations cleaning up the toxics and shipping them somewhere less obvious, we have consultants and advertising agencies all telling us how we should view all these gyrations, and THEY ALL CONTRIBUTE TO OUR GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT, aka GDP. The operational descriptive being GROSS.
We need to rethink the "unemployment rate" and what it really means for our survival. The United States could probably work BETTER with an urban unemployment rate of around 50%. For starters it sure would slow down the rate of high-chemical pollution.
Income redistribution is the real issue not only for the United States but for most economies of this world. What is the "value" of my "work" if it is only to tighten the bolts so you can come back every day and loosen them? What is the "value" of your "work"? The planet is far better off if we don't work. The fact is we are parasites. We need to redistribute "work" and "non-work" (the latter term worthy of more study given that people who feel bad because they are not "working" spend so much of their time "working" to seek "work." This is so sad, in no small part because the jobs are not there).
The fact is that the world, having migrated to production primarily by machines, has produced a GLUT of plastic consumables. Last week I spent a few hours walking through a Wal*Mart and noticed that this GLUT of imported goods included almost nothing of "value" to me.
Our approach to economics and the social order needs radical change. This poisoning of our environment by a rampantly corrupt corporate chemical system has to stop. We need a CULTURE that promotes our health instead of the sorry thing we have today, that "treats" us after the crisis and makes us pay through the nose, and still fails to make us well.
Today, it is no longer "science fiction" to imagine an economy through which most human beings are superfluous. Marx is stood on his head. "Labor" and the "surplus" drawn from it start to lose relevance when machines and IT can replace us so easily, like some guy in Florida ordering a drone attack outside Peshawar. Call me a Luddite but give me credit for thinking about it!
Oh, and something really does stink in Denmark!
I use Pur, Doll, hoping you are right!
I still wanna know what happened to that wrench! What gears it caught up in. What churning it stopped. Good story.
-30-
Anyone know about the effectiveness of reverse-osmosis and similar filter systems against this kind of thing?
It should be very effective and rather expensive. It may cost $700 or more to install one in your home. This leaves renters, like me, with limited options.
I suppose (but do not know for a fact) that the Brita and Pur systems could do the job. Chrome 6 is a rather large atom and should be filterable by these two systems.
I commend Common Dreams for printing this article and Erin Brockovich for her tenacity and investigative skills bringing resolution to the people of Hinckley.
Ms. Brockovich deserves high praise for all of her continued hard work to bring the truth to the public about toxic chemicals still in use.
The European Union has declared chemicals guilty until proven innocent.
Our corrupt government declares chemicals innocent and never proven guilty.
The chemical industry is a big contributor to the campaigns of our elected officials.
I am grateful to people like Erin Brockovich for exposing these corporations emitting toxins into our water, air, land and food.
I also take precautions in eliminating toxins from my environment buying organic food, using baking soda and white vinegar to clean my house, using personal products without aluminum, parabens, sodium laurlyl sulfates, etc. that add to the proliferation of our exposure to harmful chemicals.
In addition, I have taken action with the city I live in to end chemical use to eliminate algae in the pond behind our house and use alternative aerators instead. I took on the candle company in our neighborhood, lobbying the city, the fire department and the EPA to put a cap on their toxic emmissions.
We all have to do what we can to speak out against chemical use that can lead to cancers, asthma, respiratory problems, etc.
Vote for green party candidates where possible.
We have to force change, power never concedes without a struggle.
Sioux Rose
Ms. Brochovich is a credit to her cause; but it's a shame that EACH chemical danger must be taken as an isolated offender. As per the current system of "juistice," inordinate time is consumed in the amassing of evidence for each particular case. If, instead, the burden of proof rested on those industries intent upon polluting our waterways, ground soils, and air with "innocent-until-PROVEN-guilty" toxic substances, then the thousands who are downwind, down-water, or dwelling upon tainted soils would not have to waste away before a burden of proof was established.
I don't know if anyone in the forum remembers the "60 Minutes" story about the people in Vietnam who are STILL suffering from the carcinogenic effects of Agent Orange. Monsanto, a "leader" in today's biotech agricultural revolution, made enormous profits from this product of chemical warfare, but never paid a cent in damages to the Vietnamese. Instead, it demanded that citizens left compromised and/or contaminated produce incontrovertible evidence. It can cost a fortune to put cases together by amassing sufficient data.
Unfortunately, because modern Americans are regularly exposed to a battery of dangerous chemicals, the capacity to link only one (the subject of potential criminal investigation/charges) to deleterious health impacts is made nearly impossible. The climate of trespass, i.e. a wide community of chemical offenders, makes it possible for corporations to get away with murder. And they do. We speak about depriving these monsters of "personhood," while I also think a reversal in the burden of proof is in order, if not long overdue. Let them prove the safety of their products before thousands die. (Notice how this particular strategy plays out with big pharma: they rapidly release a new "miracle" drug and thousands ingest it, until after 5-7 years too many dangerous side effects emerge to be shoved under the radar. It is THEN that the product is recalled, having already produced its embarassment of riches. And just as the car executives cynically calculated the profits in NOT recalling the engine/car that Nader made his career upon exposing, it would seem that corporations bet human lives on exactly these same metrics.
" it's a shame that EACH chemical danger must be taken as an isolated offender."
Hi Sioux. Isn't this analgous to "finding the cure for cancer" when "cancer" is actually a whole suite of hundreds of different diseases, with different causes and treatments? I suppose that the devilish details of each individual contaminant in the environment ought to be looked at on it's own "merits". Just a thought.
Sioux Rose
Hi, JAKE. You've been off the board a long time. Your analogy makes sense to me.
My holistic friends believe that we all are exposed to cancer-causing agents, and thus the best thing we can do is keep our immune systems strong.
Many years ago, Edgar Cayce, "America's Sleeping Prophet" was asked about the treatment of cancer when he was in one of his induced trance states. He said it would take MANY years for a cure. I don't think Cayce (providing his spiritual readings during the l940's and l950's ) could have imagined the plethora of chemical agents, mutant genetically altered molecules, and other items that our bodies must now stand up to. I believe that just as Thalidymide didn't show its hazardous effects until the 2nd generation was born with deformed limbs, many of the items being used today will show an impact on future generations. Meanwhile, while considered safe, they are anything but.
"You've been off the board a long time."
"The Neocons" cut my funding. Times are tough all over. :-)
I was getting everything rejected as spam, now I don't see the spam filter at all. Looks like they were having a lot of trouble with that thing. I also upgraded my browser to IE8.
"Your analogy makes sense to me.
Thanks, see below.
"could have imagined the plethora of chemical agents, mutant genetically altered molecules, and other items that our bodies must now stand up to. "
You take the analogy further above by making the link, that makes sense. Bye!
"California has always led the way in setting standards that other states follow."
And so it is so. I've sponsored legislation to ban the use of this chemical in manufacturing and commercial applications in New Hampshire.
Those interested in supporting this endeavor may contact me at steven.lindsey@leg.state.nh.us
---SWL
We are all contaminated by these soulless profit mongers, and we are all very, very lucky to have people like Erin Brockovich on our side.
"Profit mongers" perhaps, ingnorant to much, probable, but "soulless"? Anytime we dehumanize we block a human avenue for finding a human solution to a human problem. Kudos to Erin for disciplining herself to finding and forming an effective sophisticated human response - give her the Vandana Shiva award, or should Shiva win the Brocovich prize?