Water Polluters: Should They Be Allowed To Sell In The Usa?

Water pollution is a pressing issue in the United States, with industrial waste and improper dumping contaminating drinking water sources for millions of people. While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates certain chemicals in drinking water, many others are not adequately addressed, allowing harmful substances like arsenic, lead, and mercury to persist in water supplies. This has led to a situation where companies that pollute water can continue to operate and sell their products in the USA, often due to weak or unenforced regulations, and the ability of these companies to influence politicians and regulatory bodies.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates 94 chemicals in drinking water sources

The EPA sets legal limits on over 90 contaminants in drinking water. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) gives individual states the opportunity to set and enforce their own drinking water standards if they are at least as stringent as the EPA's national standards. The EPA rules also set water-testing schedules and methods that water systems must follow.

The EPA must periodically publish a list of contaminants (called the Contaminant Candidate List or CCL) and decide whether to regulate at least five or more contaminants on the list. A regulatory determination is a formal decision on whether the EPA should initiate a rule-making process to develop a national primary drinking water regulation (NPDWR) for a specific contaminant.

The EPA also uses the CCL to prioritize research and data collection efforts to help the Agency determine whether it should regulate a specific contaminant. The EPA considers three criteria when making a determination to regulate:

• The contaminant may have an adverse effect on people's health
• The contaminant is known to occur or there is a high chance that it will occur in public water systems often enough and at levels of public health concern
• Regulation of the contaminant presents a meaningful opportunity for health risk reductions for people served by public water systems

Once the EPA decides to regulate a contaminant, it sets a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG). The MCLG is the maximum level of a contaminant in drinking water at which no known or anticipated adverse effects on health would occur, allowing an adequate margin of safety. After reviewing health effects data, the EPA sets the MCLG, which considers only public health and not the limits of detection and treatment technology effectiveness. Therefore, MCLGs are sometimes set at levels that water systems cannot meet because of technological limitations.

When determining an MCLG, the EPA considers the adverse health risk to sensitive subpopulations, such as those with compromised immune systems and chronic diseases. For microbial contaminants that may present public health risks, the EPA sets the MCLG at zero. This is because ingesting one protozoan, virus, or bacterium may cause adverse health effects. For chemical contaminants that are carcinogens, the EPA also sets the MCLG at zero if there is evidence that a chemical may cause cancer and there is no safe dose. If a safe dose can be determined, the EPA sets the MCLG at a level above zero that is considered safe.

For chemical contaminants that are non-carcinogens but can cause adverse non-cancer health effects (e.g., reproductive effects), the MCLG is based on the reference dose (RfD). The RfD is an estimate of the amount of a chemical that a person can be exposed to daily without anticipated adverse health effects over a lifetime. To determine the RfD, the concentration for the non-carcinogenic effects from an epidemiology or toxicology study is divided by uncertainty factors (e.g., for sensitive subpopulations). This provides a margin of safety for consumers of drinking water.

The RfD is multiplied by body weight and divided by daily water consumption to provide a Drinking Water Equivalent Level (DWEL). The DWEL is then multiplied by the relative source contribution, which is the percentage of total drinking water exposure for the general population, after considering other exposure routes (e.g., food, inhalation).

Once the MCLG is determined, the EPA sets an enforceable standard, usually a maximum contaminant level (MCL). The MCL is the maximum level of a contaminant in water delivered to any user of a public water system. When there is no reliable or economically feasible method to measure a contaminant, the EPA sets a “treatment technique” rather than an MCL. A treatment technique is an enforceable procedure or level of technological performance that public water systems must follow to ensure control of a contaminant.

The EPA regulates the discharge and treatment of wastewater under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) issues permits to all wastewater dischargers and treatment facilities, establishing specific discharge limits, monitoring, and reporting requirements. These facilities may also be required to undertake special measures to protect the environment from harmful pollutants.

The EPA does not regulate all chemicals in drinking water sources, and there are concerns that drinking water for over 244 million people in the US contains contaminants linked to industrial practices that are not currently regulated.

Companies are blind to the business risks posed by water scarcity and pollution

Water scarcity and pollution pose significant business risks that many companies are blind to. The world is facing a projected 56% shortfall in the global water supply by 2030, driven by rising demand and falling supply due to climate change impacts such as increased drought. This has far-reaching implications for businesses, as water is central to nearly every stage of the value chain, from extraction to consumption.

The consumer staples sector, which includes food, energy, and apparel, is particularly vulnerable to water risk. In 2018, global companies incurred $38.5 billion in water-related losses, and this trend is expected to worsen if proactive measures are not taken. Companies that prioritize water resource management and implement sustainable practices will be better positioned to tackle the challenges posed by water scarcity and pollution.

A key challenge in addressing the water crisis is the lack of awareness among companies about the business risks associated with water scarcity and pollution. Large industrial companies, which are significant contributors to water pollution, have ethical, financial, and legal obligations to manage water resources responsibly. However, only a small number of companies are taking adequate action.

Water-related risks can manifest in various forms, including operational disruptions, increased production costs, reputational damage, and regulatory fines. For example, a drought in Brazil in 2015 resulted in significant increases in water and electricity costs for General Motors. Similarly, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation had to incur higher water costs by trucking water for miles to keep its chip fabrication plants operational during a local water shortage.

Companies must recognize the importance of water stewardship and integrate it into their strategic business priorities. This involves assessing and understanding their value chain's water impacts and dependencies, setting ambitious targets for water conservation, and implementing initiatives to reduce water consumption and pollution. By prioritizing water resource management, companies can enhance their operational resilience, contribute to global water security, and make progress toward other environmental goals.

Additionally, companies can explore innovative solutions such as modernizing equipment, adopting circular water practices, and transitioning to renewable energy sources, which have a lower water footprint. By taking proactive measures, businesses can not only mitigate water-related risks but also unlock new revenue streams and increase access to capital and profits. Consumers are increasingly favoring companies that demonstrate a commitment to environmental sustainability, providing a further incentive for companies to address water scarcity and pollution.

Water-related risks could cost companies up to $425 billion in the next 1-3 years

Water-related risks are a pressing issue for companies, with potential costs reaching up to $425 billion in the next 1-3 years. This is due to a combination of water scarcity, pollution, and the need to address these issues. The risks are not limited to a specific sector but affect a wide range of industries, including manufacturing, mining, waste disposal, utilities, and food and beverage companies.

Water scarcity is an increasingly significant challenge, with the world facing a 56% shortfall in the available global water supply by 2030. This is driven by rising demand and falling supply due to climate change impacts such as increased drought conditions. For example, water shortages pose a real threat to agricultural supply chains, as seen with Nestlé and Kraft Heinz. Additionally, water stress in certain US regions, such as Arizona, is on par with that of the Middle East and North Africa, highlighting the severity of the issue.

Pollution is another critical factor contributing to water-related risks. The World Bank warns of a hidden crisis, with 80% of municipal and industrial wastewater returned untreated globally, and 50% of rivers in the United States polluted. The Clean Water Act aims to regulate the discharge of chemicals into water sources, but regulatory loopholes and a lack of enforcement have allowed industrial polluters to continue their harmful practices. Improper dumping and waste disposal by corporations impact water availability and quality, with the drinking water of over 244 million people in the US containing contaminants linked to industrial activities.

The financial implications of water-related risks are significant. Companies that fail to address these issues face substantial costs, including increased production costs, loss of consumer preference for more sustainable products, negative investor sentiment, reputational damage, and regulatory fines. However, there are also opportunities for companies that take proactive measures. US companies identify $340 billion in water-related business opportunities by taking urgent protective actions. These opportunities include new revenue streams, increased access to capital, and higher profits as investors favour companies that effectively manage water risks.

To mitigate water-related risks, companies must take several critical steps. Firstly, they should reduce water withdrawals and consumption in their direct operations and throughout their value chains, especially in water-stressed areas. Secondly, they need to eliminate pollution incidents and treat discharged water to meet or exceed environmental standards. Thirdly, setting and achieving targets for water consumption, withdrawals, and pollution reduction is essential, demonstrating their commitment to sustainability. Finally, advocating for and supporting sound environmental policies and regulations that protect freshwater sources is crucial for long-term success.

In conclusion, water-related risks pose a significant threat to companies, with potential costs of up to $425 billion in the next 1-3 years. However, by taking bold and transformative actions, companies can not only mitigate these risks but also gain competitive advantages and contribute to a more sustainable future.

The Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of chemicals into lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands and coastal areas

The Clean Water Act is a federal law in the United States that regulates the discharge of pollutants into the nation's lakes, rivers, streams, wetlands, and coastal areas. Passed in 1972, the Act was originally known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The Clean Water Act is administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which sets water quality standards, handles enforcement, and assists state and local governments in developing their own pollution control plans.

The Act's original goal was to eliminate the discharge of untreated wastewater from municipal and industrial sources, making American waterways safe for swimming and fishing. The federal government provided billions of dollars in grants to finance the building of sewage treatment facilities across the country. The Act also required businesses to apply for federal permits to discharge pollutants into waterways and to reduce the amount of their discharges over time.

The Clean Water Act has been successful in reducing pollution from "point sources," such as municipal and industrial discharges. By 1998, 60% of American lakes, rivers, and shorelines were considered clean enough for swimming and fishing. However, it became clear that "point source" pollution was only part of the problem, and by the late 1990s, the EPA shifted its focus to addressing nonpoint source pollution, such as chemicals from agricultural runoff or erosion from logging or construction activities.

The EPA sets national water quality criteria and specifies allowable levels of various chemical pollutants. The discharge of regulated chemicals is controlled by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), which requires polluters to obtain federal permits for each chemical they discharge. The NPDES has faced criticism from industry groups for its ambiguous regulatory policies and long delays in granting permits.

In 2000, the EPA took steps to address polluted waterways and nonpoint source pollution by introducing new rules that encouraged states to identify dirty waterways, establish standards, and work with local landowners and businesses to reduce pollution levels. This measurement was known as the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). The TMDL program proved controversial, with some arguing that it would discourage development along polluted waterways and restrict property owners' rights, while others claimed that compliance would be too expensive.

Another area of controversy involves the regulation of wetlands. Under the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has jurisdiction over navigable waterways and associated wetlands. Legal disputes regarding the scope of this jurisdiction have reached the Supreme Court, with rulings impacting permitting requirements for future developments on or near wetlands.

While the Clean Water Act has made significant progress in reducing water pollution, challenges remain. Agricultural runoff, which is not regulated by the Act, is now the leading cause of waterbodies failing to meet water quality standards. Additionally, in 2023, the Supreme Court removed federal protections for up to two-thirds of wetlands and millions of miles of streams, ruling that the Act only applies to "relatively permanent" bodies of water with a "continuous surface connection." This decision is expected to have negative repercussions on water quality, wildlife, and flood control across the United States.

The EPA monitors more than 90% of Superfund sites to ensure the health of people and the environment

In the United States, companies that pollute water sources are often manufacturing, mining, and waste disposal corporations. These companies contaminate drinking water with chemicals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and chromium, which can have severe health consequences for nearby residents.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates 94 chemicals in drinking water sources, but many other potentially harmful chemicals are not subject to regulation. As a result, the drinking water of over 244 million people in the US contains contaminants linked to industrial practices.

To address this issue, the EPA established the Superfund program, authorized by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980. CERCLA enables the EPA to create a list of polluted locations, known as Superfund sites, which require long-term responses to clean up hazardous material contaminations. These sites include landfills, mines, manufacturing facilities, and processing plants where toxic waste has been improperly managed or dumped.

The EPA's Superfund program has several key goals:

• Protect human health and the environment by cleaning up contaminated sites;
• Ensure that responsible parties pay for cleanup work;
• Involve communities in the Superfund process;
• Return Superfund sites to productive use.

The EPA continuously monitors more than 90% of Superfund sites to ensure the health of people and the environment. This involves assessing the extent of contamination, developing remediation plans, and overseeing cleanup efforts. As of June 2024, there were 1,340 Superfund sites on the National Priorities List, with 39 additional sites proposed for entry. The EPA has successfully cleaned up and removed 457 sites from the list.

While the EPA's efforts are crucial, it is essential for companies to take proactive measures to reduce their water consumption, eliminate pollution incidents, and set targets for water consumption and pollution reduction. By prioritizing sustainable water practices, companies can contribute to ensuring clean water for all communities and promoting environmental responsibility.

Frequently asked questions