EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
Popular content
Today's Top News
Los Angeles and Kern County's Epic Sewage Sludge Battle
Kern County has the sad role of being California's toilet. Kern County receives everything that goes down the drain from households, hospitals, and industry, from one of the largest and most densely populated counties in the country, not Kern but Los Angeles County. The resulting toxic stew of industrial and human sewage sludge is not a pretty thing, and most people in Kern County and their representatives don't want any of it. Unfortunately for citizens of Kern County, Los Angeles is willing to fight -- and fight hard -- to continue dumping sludge in Kern County.
Kern County, California
A Toxic Stew
Sewage sludge can contain heavy metals, pesticides, dioxins, flame retardants, pharmaceuticals, perfluorinated compounds, nanoparticles, pathogens, known endocrine disruptors, and more. Of those, only 10 heavy metals out of dozens are regulated in sewage sludge that is applied to land where animal feed is grown as fertilizer. The strictest regulation, which the EPA calls "Class A Biosolids" ("biosolids" is a term the sewage industry made up to make sludge sound more palatable), has the same restrictions on heavy metals, plus two other criteria: it must have no detectable salmonella or fecal coliform, and it must be treated so that it is not attractive to disease-carrying organisms like rats or flies. But this leaves in and unaccounted for numerous other pathogens, as well as an array of heavy metals and other substances like PBDEs concentrated in the resulting sludge.
Kern County Says No More
Prior to 2006, Kern County was the dumping ground for one-third of California's sewage sludge, receiving sludge from Orange County, Los Angeles County, Oxnard and Ventura. Los Angeles sends 750 tons per day alone to Green Acres, a 4,688 acre Kern County operation owned by Los Angeles county that grows corn, wheat, and alfalfa for dairy cattle feed. But in June 2006, an overwhelming majority of Kern County voters passed the Keep Kern Clean Ordinance, a ballot measure that banned application of sewage sludge to land in Kern County. The ban was to begin six months after the vote, in December 2006.
With a ban on applying sewage sludge in Kern County, Los Angeles and Orange Counties planned to send their sludge to the nearest place that would take it: Arizona. L.A. anticipated an increase in sludge disposal costs from $7 million per year to as much as $21 million per year. (This is getting to the heart of the matter, as the scheme to dump the sludge and its contaminants on farmfields is favored by cities because it is cheap compared to the other containment or disposal options. In the past, sludge was dumped in the oceans until environmental groups sued because it was toxic to marine life. Clearly, if it kills the fish, then it's safe enough to put on land where we grow food, right?)
Los Angeles Fights Back
After Kern's sludge ban passed, Los Angeles sued. A few weeks before the ban went into effect, Los Angeles won an injunction, as Judge Gary Allen Feess of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California decided to "temporarily block Kern County from enforcing a ban on the land application of biosolids from urban municipalities until the court rules on the merits of the case." For Kern, that meant that they would have to live with L.A.'s sludge until the case was resolved.
But the next stop for the case was the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled in Kern's favor in 2009 (three years after the sludge ban was initially passed). Kern County was allowed to enforce its sludge ban at this point, but it chose to wait until the legal battle was settled to do so. In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving Kern's victory in place. Case closed, right?
Deja Poo All Over Again
With their court victory in hand, Kern County got ready, once again, to enforce its ban. Without any further legal action, the ban would go into effect in October 2011. Then Los Angeles took them back to court, claiming that a statewide recycling law (the California Integrated Waste Management Act) trumps Kern County's right to ban the application of sewage sludge. With the case back in court, this past June, Tulare County Superior Court judge Lloyd L. Hicks put the ban on hold once again with "a tentative ruling... that Los Angeles sanitation districts and haulers are likely to win their case against Kern County and that the city and county of Los Angeles would be seriously harmed" if the sludge ban was allowed to take effect.
He also found that "Kern County's law was likely to lose in a full court battle and that the costs Los Angeles would suffer from not being able to spread its treated human and industrial waste on Kern County farmland outweighed any perceived harm from flies, odors or leeching of the sludge into groundwater." Got that? Because Los Angeles having to pay more to haul their sludge to Arizona is worse than the "perceived" harm from sewage sludge, Kern County citizens do not have the right to keep Los Angeles County sludge out of their county.
The case is still up in the air, and -- for the time being -- Kern County is still receiving hundreds of tons of L.A.'s sewage sludge each and every day.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


11 Comments so far
Show AllJust became aware of the Super Critical Water Oxidation process for treating municipal sewage sludge. According to tests and projections by proponents, not only does the process eliminate all of the pollutants listed above, the process also recovers phosphorous in a re-usable form and generates excess heat that can (and has been) converted to steam to gen elect. Total volume reduction is approx 95% and residue is inert and re-usable. Some other metals are also recoverable by the process.
Put these benefits together with the reduction in vehicle emmisions (and operating expense) from not having to truck the undigested volume of sludge to distant dump sites and building SCWO plants immediately makes great sense. Here is a true infrastructure improvement. Proponents' cost projections also claim cheapest method of treatment/disposal compared to alternatives, including landspreading.
The process you mention seems to do everything except put the coffee on in the morning. But how does it help Kern County? Los Angeles would have to build a humongous plant to implement this process, at great cost. Would it be willing to do that when it can just dump the stuff, for much less money on its neighbor?
Justaman is regurgitating the pseudo-intellectual propaganda that attempts but fails to justify man's foolish defiance/neglect hostility/oppression of the natural world. Just think what that does to the people. It whacks their connection with nature. Whacking our connection with nature is like whacking our senses, depriving us of the enjoyment of nature's gifts, and of a productive relationship with nature. But the propagandists have their partners in crime - the lawyers. The lawyers, and judges, such as those supporting LA County and nature destructors in general, don't get very much publicity/criticism in the civic debates. You will know that Merkan democracy has matured when the lawyers are brought to trial on a regular basis. They hide behind a false doctrine that claims, without merit, that they are merely defending the interests of people, interest that we supposedly have rights to. Do you have a right to destroy the earth? No, you see, most of the foundation of Merkan philosophy, that fuels 'konventional wisdom', is crumbly. We have to complete the natural cycles. This means what comes out the bottoms of our bodies should go back into the soil that grows our food. And so obviously we can't mix poisons into that. Duh! Merka is so disconnected from the truth it ain't funny.
If anyone is regurgitating nonsense it is you. Nothing in your rant addresses in any way seriously the situation described in the article. I puposely sought out a position with a waste company not becuse I loved the smell of fetid garbage on a sweltering summer day, or just relished the feel on my thinly gloved hand shoved into sewage sludge from some distant east coast city to retrieve samples for testing.
I wanted to be there because I care about what happens to our waste. Municipal Sewage Sludge exists because of our successful efforts to remove this crap from our surface waters, from one of our successful efforts to be environmentallly responsible. Your rant does nothing to solve a problem that we all have a part in creating.
Please search Super Critical Waste Oxidation before you make snide remarks. I didn't create, finance, or work on this process. When I first heard about it on the science channel I also thought that it sounded too good to be true, because I have actually worked in the waste industry, specifically with the disposal, treatment, and re-use of municipal sewage sludge.
According to the developer this system is much more cost effective than landspreading, which I thought I pointed out and I also stated that the the volume reduction is about 95% In the end it will cost LA less to do this than continue to ship large volumes of sludge to ever more distant dumps sites.
Please research this system/process before you reject it out of hand. What is happening with LA/Kern County is happening all over the country. The reason that municpal san authorities deal with mss the way they do is because there have not been good workable alternatives. I actually did research this, and based against what I know are the true costs of construction, transportation and disposal, it appears to me that this system, if it works dependably, will cost much less than landspreading.
This article raises one of the most important -- and most neglected -- environmental issues of all -- how to handle human waste. Sewage systems saved many thousands, probably millions, of lives over the centuries. But they have outlived their usefulness. We can't afford to defecate into our water, then clean, and then drink it. Water is our most precious resource and terrestrial mammals like us should not defecate into water. We have the technology to replace our sewage systems.
Also, by mingling human feces with other pollutants such as heavy metals, it becomes unusable for agricultural purposes (except I would suspect corporations package it and sell it for fertilizer, heavy metals and all).
World wide humans must spend many billions of dollars every year cleaning water we polluted. It makes no sense.
At least you understand the elemental truth, that this is a very serious reality that we haven't dealt with properly yet. Propose another system for a metropolis that will function better than the municipal sewage systems we have today. So in NY, Chicago, SF, LA, etc we're going to have fleets of shit trucks going to every door every morning and collecting our feces and urine? How very safe and sanitary, everyone will really love it, especially their homes smelling like a treatment plant.
Our sewage systems are NOT centuries old and if you think that keeping our continuous stream of septic waste seperate from our surface waters is no longer useful then you should go to Africa or the like where sanitary systems don't exist. The regulation of municipal sewage sludge is a fairly recent development because the problem didn't arise until the major effect of the clean water act was felt - the successful removal of waste from our surface waters. There was hope when the regulations passed for the composting possibilities. Human waste, like all animal waste, contains nutrients that could be returned to the soil. But the waste stream is polluted with everything that people dump down the drain, that industry dumps down the drain, and increasingly in our overmedicated society what we ingest and is passed through our systems. If our centralized collection and treatment systems (that basically concentrate the solids and treats the liquid portion) could eliminate large point source polluters, if everyone in the privacy of their homes did not dump what shouldn't be dumped down the drain, and if everyone taking a medication that will end up in their waste disposed of their unwanted bodily wastes somewhere else, then composting could be made to work. Given that, a safe composted mss is near impossible.
The alternative to NOT spending billions every year to treat our waste water is disease and a return to third-world conditions. The task of cleaning up our surface waters, which we have made great progress on, is not complete until we successfully deal with mss. The SWOC process I mentioned here is an alternative method developed in response to the failures of all the other current arrangements, ie. large waste authorities continuously shipping large volumes of their waste to rural counties.
Many alternative strategies can be imagined, but they are all particular to the mode of living. Rural, suburban, and metropolitan alternatives will all be different from each other, but it is hard to see how large cities could be more safely and effectively served than with current centralized collection and treatment, IF their mss can be neutralized so that the problem is solved and not just moved to where LA can't smell it.
Could Kern County continue to take the sludge and use it to generate and export the resulting electricity?
An SWOC plant or alternative could be built anywhere to treat mss. Why spend the fuel and the money shipping a large volume of untreated material when it can be treated at the existing treatment facilities and the reduced volume residue then shipped? The excess heat capture is secondary, the main purpose of this process is to render inert a very serious and growing waste pollutant. All of the money involved here comes from the munic san auth, Kern county should not want to be saddled with the responsibility and cost of constructing and maintaining that metropolis' waste infrstructure and responsibility.
Why the hell did the county not put its sludge ban into effect in 2009, when it could have done so? If they had, Tulare County Superior Court judge Lloyd L. Hicks would have had a very different set of facts in effect to rule on. Ms Richardson does not explain the county's thinking on the matter, which smacks of accommodation to Los Angeles.
The strategy that has been employed by the waste industry all over the country is that waste bans violate interstate commerce regulations, and this principle has been upheld almost without exception. Open commerce regulations will be at the heart of the LA authority's defense.