SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
What's in a Name? EPA Proposes to Call Sewage Sludge "Compost"
Mar 03, 2004
Juliet said to Romeo, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." When Juliet spoke to Romeo in Capulet's orchard, she had nary a thought about sewage sludge. You might think that her suggestion, that a thing is what it is, not what it is called, would have the Environmental Protection Agency crying "O Happy Dagger" and plunging a knife into its heart; but alas, this is not post-medieval Verona but Orwellian Washington where the EPA would have us think that sewage sludge is compost.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing that the government's definition of compost include sewage sludge. The rule change is couched in a December 10, 2003 Federal Register notice about proposed revisions to the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines (CPG). It would consolidate all compost designations under one item called "compost made from recovered organic materials." The result would be a fooled public and further degradation health and the environment.
The EPA's preferred method of disposal of sewage sludge in the United States is land application. To get the public to accept this has required a concerted effort from government and the sludge-industry to make the public think that sludge is "organic," "nutrient-rich," and otherwise "beneficial." Calling sludge "compost" is the agency's latest trick. The proposal here to "compost" sludge is based on the dependable presence of human feces in sludge. Human feces do indeed consist largely of organic matter. But sludge consists only partly of human feces.
It is the purpose of wastewater treatment to extract from sewage-and to concentrate in sludge-all the pollutants in wastewater. The intended product of wastewater treatment is clean water. Sludge is the inevitable byproduct that, by definition and intention, consists of every waste material a given wastewater treatment plant is capable of removing, or is incidentally removed, from the sewage in the process of treating the wastewater. This means that, besides human urine and feces, tens of thousands of chemicals-organic and inorganic, teratogenic and carcinogenic, toxic and estrogen mimicking-will be present in the sludge.
The idea, therefore, of "treating" sludge so that it can become "compost," a "soil amendment," a "fertilizer"-is disingenuous. Once mixed together, the potential value of each and all of the materials concentrated in the sludge is lost. No "treatment" of sludge can "purify" the human excrement: once mixed with poisons, it too becomes a poison.
The problems deriving from sewage are indeed massive. Sewers give sewage. Treatment gives sludge. What to do? How to get rid of the sludge? The solution proposed here is only linguistic laundering: call sludge "biosolids", call "biosolids" compost, and, through the "Comprehensive Procurement Guideline V for Procurement of Products Containing Recovered Materials," legally oblige federal, state, and local entities, and contractors working for same to preferentially purchase sludge aka "biosolids" aka "compost" when purchasing "recovered materials." To put in bags of neat looking pellets to sell as "compost" to unwary gardeners. That will get rid of a lot of it, and it will take a long time for people to come to understand what happened to them.
At the end of Romeo & Juliet, the Prince says, "A glooming peace this morning with it brings; the sun, for sorrow, will not show his head: go hence, to have more talk of these sad things; some shall be pardon'd, and some punished: for never was a story of more woe than this of Juliet and her Romeo." The Prince, like Juliet, had never heard of sewage sludge. It too is a sad story and one with no pardon for EPA's deceits.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Laura Orlando
Laura Orlando (lorlando@bu.edu) is Executive Director of the Resource Institute for Low Entropy Systems and an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Boston University School of Public Health.
Juliet said to Romeo, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." When Juliet spoke to Romeo in Capulet's orchard, she had nary a thought about sewage sludge. You might think that her suggestion, that a thing is what it is, not what it is called, would have the Environmental Protection Agency crying "O Happy Dagger" and plunging a knife into its heart; but alas, this is not post-medieval Verona but Orwellian Washington where the EPA would have us think that sewage sludge is compost.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing that the government's definition of compost include sewage sludge. The rule change is couched in a December 10, 2003 Federal Register notice about proposed revisions to the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines (CPG). It would consolidate all compost designations under one item called "compost made from recovered organic materials." The result would be a fooled public and further degradation health and the environment.
The EPA's preferred method of disposal of sewage sludge in the United States is land application. To get the public to accept this has required a concerted effort from government and the sludge-industry to make the public think that sludge is "organic," "nutrient-rich," and otherwise "beneficial." Calling sludge "compost" is the agency's latest trick. The proposal here to "compost" sludge is based on the dependable presence of human feces in sludge. Human feces do indeed consist largely of organic matter. But sludge consists only partly of human feces.
It is the purpose of wastewater treatment to extract from sewage-and to concentrate in sludge-all the pollutants in wastewater. The intended product of wastewater treatment is clean water. Sludge is the inevitable byproduct that, by definition and intention, consists of every waste material a given wastewater treatment plant is capable of removing, or is incidentally removed, from the sewage in the process of treating the wastewater. This means that, besides human urine and feces, tens of thousands of chemicals-organic and inorganic, teratogenic and carcinogenic, toxic and estrogen mimicking-will be present in the sludge.
The idea, therefore, of "treating" sludge so that it can become "compost," a "soil amendment," a "fertilizer"-is disingenuous. Once mixed together, the potential value of each and all of the materials concentrated in the sludge is lost. No "treatment" of sludge can "purify" the human excrement: once mixed with poisons, it too becomes a poison.
The problems deriving from sewage are indeed massive. Sewers give sewage. Treatment gives sludge. What to do? How to get rid of the sludge? The solution proposed here is only linguistic laundering: call sludge "biosolids", call "biosolids" compost, and, through the "Comprehensive Procurement Guideline V for Procurement of Products Containing Recovered Materials," legally oblige federal, state, and local entities, and contractors working for same to preferentially purchase sludge aka "biosolids" aka "compost" when purchasing "recovered materials." To put in bags of neat looking pellets to sell as "compost" to unwary gardeners. That will get rid of a lot of it, and it will take a long time for people to come to understand what happened to them.
At the end of Romeo & Juliet, the Prince says, "A glooming peace this morning with it brings; the sun, for sorrow, will not show his head: go hence, to have more talk of these sad things; some shall be pardon'd, and some punished: for never was a story of more woe than this of Juliet and her Romeo." The Prince, like Juliet, had never heard of sewage sludge. It too is a sad story and one with no pardon for EPA's deceits.
Laura Orlando
Laura Orlando (lorlando@bu.edu) is Executive Director of the Resource Institute for Low Entropy Systems and an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Boston University School of Public Health.
Juliet said to Romeo, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." When Juliet spoke to Romeo in Capulet's orchard, she had nary a thought about sewage sludge. You might think that her suggestion, that a thing is what it is, not what it is called, would have the Environmental Protection Agency crying "O Happy Dagger" and plunging a knife into its heart; but alas, this is not post-medieval Verona but Orwellian Washington where the EPA would have us think that sewage sludge is compost.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing that the government's definition of compost include sewage sludge. The rule change is couched in a December 10, 2003 Federal Register notice about proposed revisions to the Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines (CPG). It would consolidate all compost designations under one item called "compost made from recovered organic materials." The result would be a fooled public and further degradation health and the environment.
The EPA's preferred method of disposal of sewage sludge in the United States is land application. To get the public to accept this has required a concerted effort from government and the sludge-industry to make the public think that sludge is "organic," "nutrient-rich," and otherwise "beneficial." Calling sludge "compost" is the agency's latest trick. The proposal here to "compost" sludge is based on the dependable presence of human feces in sludge. Human feces do indeed consist largely of organic matter. But sludge consists only partly of human feces.
It is the purpose of wastewater treatment to extract from sewage-and to concentrate in sludge-all the pollutants in wastewater. The intended product of wastewater treatment is clean water. Sludge is the inevitable byproduct that, by definition and intention, consists of every waste material a given wastewater treatment plant is capable of removing, or is incidentally removed, from the sewage in the process of treating the wastewater. This means that, besides human urine and feces, tens of thousands of chemicals-organic and inorganic, teratogenic and carcinogenic, toxic and estrogen mimicking-will be present in the sludge.
The idea, therefore, of "treating" sludge so that it can become "compost," a "soil amendment," a "fertilizer"-is disingenuous. Once mixed together, the potential value of each and all of the materials concentrated in the sludge is lost. No "treatment" of sludge can "purify" the human excrement: once mixed with poisons, it too becomes a poison.
The problems deriving from sewage are indeed massive. Sewers give sewage. Treatment gives sludge. What to do? How to get rid of the sludge? The solution proposed here is only linguistic laundering: call sludge "biosolids", call "biosolids" compost, and, through the "Comprehensive Procurement Guideline V for Procurement of Products Containing Recovered Materials," legally oblige federal, state, and local entities, and contractors working for same to preferentially purchase sludge aka "biosolids" aka "compost" when purchasing "recovered materials." To put in bags of neat looking pellets to sell as "compost" to unwary gardeners. That will get rid of a lot of it, and it will take a long time for people to come to understand what happened to them.
At the end of Romeo & Juliet, the Prince says, "A glooming peace this morning with it brings; the sun, for sorrow, will not show his head: go hence, to have more talk of these sad things; some shall be pardon'd, and some punished: for never was a story of more woe than this of Juliet and her Romeo." The Prince, like Juliet, had never heard of sewage sludge. It too is a sad story and one with no pardon for EPA's deceits.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.