Perkins, T. (2022, October 18). More than 80% of us waterways contaminated by ‘forever chemicals’. The Guardian. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/18/pfas-forever-chemicals-80-percent-us-waterways-contaminated 

Tom Perkins introduces the article by stating that most of the waterways in America are very likely to contain toxic PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals”. In the Waterkeeper Alliance analysis, PFAS levels in around 83% percent of waterways tested throughout multiple states were detected. CEO of the Waterkeeper Alliance, Marc Yaggi, explains that the detected PFAS contamination is proof that the rules and regulations on water quality/protection need to be updated. PFAS earned the name “forever chemicals”; they were created to make products more resistant which means they don’t break down naturally. It was also discovered that PFAS are linked to diseases such as cancer, liver problems, kidney diseases, and other health issues. Past tests and analyses have discovered that these chemicals have successfully contaminated drinking water for over 200 million people. Because of the regulations and laws that aren’t up to standard, big industrial companies have been able to release all their toxic waste into the environment, mostly water, without any punishments. More studies have been conducted on chemical levels in water and the results were that most bodies of water were contaminated. The bodies of water that didn’t show any signs of contamination were located in rural areas with no machinery. While the EPA has come up with some solutions to help the issue such as designating PFOS and PFOA as dangerous substances, there has to be a lot more done to have safe drinking water.

This article talked more about the substances that are polluting our water and backed it up with evidence from multiple tests of contamination. I found the “forever chemicals” interesting to learn about and I also wasn’t aware of how many states don’t have clean drinking water. I wonder how long these chemicals have existed, how long they’ve been dumped into our water, and how long it would take to cancel out the contamination. It’s a little nerve-wracking to think that there are chemicals in your water that are linked to diseases such as cancer. I also think that this article backs up the point that groups such as the EPA aren’t doing enough to make progress toward clean water. The solutions that they’ve brought up are temporary and they probably wouldn’t be strongly reinforced. I’m afraid that forever chemicals are just the beginning of the decline of our water quality if something isn’t done soon.

Bosman, A. (2022, October 5). Water quality threatened by nutrient pollution in 40 U.S. states. Earth.com. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.earth.com/news/water-quality-threatened-by-nutrient-pollution-in-40-u-s-states/ 

Alison Bosman introduces the article by talking about climate change and how people usually associate it with heat waves, ocean temperatures rising, etc. However, it’s important to look at winter for statistics show it is the season that is warming the fastest in the U.S. Scientists from various states have come together and discovered a new threat to the water quality in the U.S. that is related to the rising temperature in climate change. Normally, nutrients from farming activities stay frozen throughout winter and thaw in the spring. When these nutrients thaw, they have been spread out into rivers and lakes for plants to utilize. Due to climate change and warmer winters, the nutrients thaw much quicker but the plants aren’t able to use them because it is technically still winter. This results in what is known as nutrient pollution. Winter nutrient pollution is seen as a newer form of pollution for its impacts have only been more significant due to the temperature rise. Some effects of this pollution are algal blooms, dead zones, harming aquatic life, etc. Researchers and scientists have also focused on “rain-on-snow” which is when rain causes snow to melt, leading to extreme floods and more nutrient pollution in waterways. Studies have been made to learn more about this effect, nutrient pollution, and water quality. One study discovered that nutrient pollution has the potential to put water quality at risk. Another study was done on the Mississippi River floods in 2019 and discovered a large number of nutrients and sediments in the river and the Gulf of Mexico. The article ends up talking more about the large-scale effects that this form of pollution has on the quality and safety of our water, hoping that the evidence discovered will inspire the government to take action.

Though the topic is water pollution, this article highlights a key component of the topic. When people think of water pollution, they’re most likely to think of oil spills, dumping harmful chemicals into water, etc. However, there are different ways to pollute water and this article proves that nutrient pollution is one of them. One could argue that this form of pollution contributes to worsening the quality of the country’s water. Just like in oil refineries, harmful substances and compounds are being released into bodies of water, affecting aquatic life, affecting human life, and affecting the quality of water. Another thing that this form of pollution has in common is that the government isn’t putting enough effort into reducing it which has been a common trend throughout many articles. It’s interesting to learn about the many contributors to the poor quality of our water.

Newburger, E. (2022, December 31). EPA issues Clean Water Rule that repeals Trump administration changes. CNBC. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/30/epa-issues-clean-water-rule-that-repeals-trump-administration-changes.html?&qsearchterm=water+pollution 

The Biden Administration issued a rule that established the types of waterways in the U.S. that would receive federal water quality protections under the 1972 Clean Water Act. By doing this, it repealed Trump’s decision to repeal the water regulation that Obama had set ( limiting the amount of pollution and chemicals in the country’s bodies of water ) which the federal courts and environmental groups were not fond of. According to the EPA and Department of the Army, the rule that the Biden Administration issued was a revised version of the one that Obama issued. Officials have stated that the rule ensures a more durable definition of the “waters of the United States”. It also means that a large number of the country’s bodies of water will receive federal protection and restore shields. Ones that are federally protected qualify for government programs that maintain water quality, prevent oil spills, and more. Environmental groups have raised their concerns that by slacking on federal water protections, the quality of the country’s drinking water would worsen. Other groups such as farming, oil, gas, and real estate developers view the regulations as something that could negatively affect their businesses and supported the decision that Trump made on the matter. Changes are also included that define specific requirements for waters that aren’t under regulation. It’s also been said that the rule’s definition of waterways will diminish uncertainty from developing regulatory definitions that have negatively impacted communities and the country’s water.

This article focuses on a rule that the Biden Administration established on the waterways in the country. I thought it was interesting that it was a revised version of Obama’s but it was especially interesting to see what type of people and groups supported this rule or preferred Trump’s decision. It’d be interesting to see why those specific industries were upset with the new rule. However, I think that setting regulations can have many benefits and improve the quality of the bodies of water in the country. Though it may draw some setbacks for businesses, is making money or having clean drinking water more important? In a lot of other articles I’ve read about water pollution, it seems like the government either doesn’t care enough or cares too much about a small issue. I think it’s a good thing that water quality/pollution is becoming more significant because it is something that could affect us all if not taken seriously. 

, A. P. (2022, October 25). US Justice Department sues Idaho City Over Water Pollution. U.S. News. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/idaho/articles/2022-10-25/us-justice-department-sues-idaho-city-over-water-pollution 

As a result of dumping toxic waste and pollutants into a stream, the city of Driggs in Idaho received a lawsuit from the federal government. On October 24, 2022, a lawsuit for more than $160 million from the U.S. Department of Justice was filed in Idaho’s U.S. District Court. They claimed that the city violated the Clean Water Act by dumping waste that contained a high amount of harmful substances that violated wastewater permit rules more than 2,600 times for almost a decade. The stream that the waste was dumped into is known as Woods Creek which flows into multiple rivers in the area. These rivers consist of the Teton River, Henry’s Fork, the Snake, and Columbia Rivers which flow into the Pacific Ocean. In addition to the scenery, Henry’s Fork and the Teton River are popular fly-fishing locations that draw in a lot of tourism and fishermen. Though such a lawsuit could potentially leave the small town bankrupt, the city publicly stated that the situation was a positive opportunity for them and the EPA to work together to fix the issue. Officials from the city believed that because their wastewater treatment facility was in such poor condition, the city and the EPA could reach a legal agreement and upgrade the facility so that it could meet federal standards. Unfortunately, the Department of Justice would rather the city pay the fine and obey the Clean Water Act and other pollution rules that the federal government established.

In my opinion, this article was just one example of many instances of illegal dumping and water pollution throughout the country. At first, I was a little surprised that the Department of Justice cared so much that a random small city in Idaho dumped some waste but I wonder if they only cared because the dumping affected popular rivers. If it didn’t affect them then how would the government react? Why would they care so much about a random town when there are other, much worse instances of water pollution in the country? I also found it interesting how the city believed that there would be a chance of the EPA upgrading their water treatment facility after they had just broken federal pollution rules. Compared to reading a list of states with contaminated water, I think that looking at smaller and more specific events has the advantage of gaining more depth into the effects of pollution. Though one of the shorter articles, I still think this can inform someone about the effects of water pollution, not just how it affects the environment. 

Hersher, R. (2023, January 26). Oil refineries release lots of water pollution near communities of color, Data Show. NPR. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.npr.org/2023/01/26/1151464514/oil-refineries-release-lots-of-water-pollution-near-communities-of-color-data-sh 

Studies and reports have proven that oil refineries are responsible for billions of pounds of pollution and how it is specifically impacting communities of color. In addition to harmful chemicals such as nitrogen, oil refineries are also dumping heavy metals into waterways. The compounds that are released into the water can kill aquatic organisms, feed harmful algae, and make waterways a hazard to even humans. The pollution has negatively impacted environments and communities all over the country, specifically around the Gulf Coast and Chicago. Groups and reporters such as the Environmental Integrity Project have observed and analyzed data on the issue that the EPA ( Environmental Protection Agency ) has collected. It was discovered that many oil refineries are dumping more pollution into waterways than what is allowed by the law. However, these refineries are usually allowed to get away with the amount of waste they are releasing because the EPA has not put enough effort into stopping them. History has shown that people who live in more impoverished areas are more likely to be subject to the negative effects of all types of pollution. Reports have proven this to be true, revealing that many high-polluting refineries are located closer to poverty-stricken areas than rich areas. Other studies have made discoveries that further back up this point. NPR discovered that a large portion of harmful substances from refineries was found at places that were near communities of color. More reports and studies are constantly being conducted and are constantly proving the fact that people of color face the worst of the pollution. The article closes by talking about how the rules that the EPA established for pollution regulations are outdated and need to be updated. Unfortunately, it seems like the EPA has not shown any interest in reducing pollution from oil refineries for no updates have been made yet.

This article shed light on the impacts that pollution from oil refineries has had on waterways and specifically the communities of color that live nearby these facilities. I wasn’t aware of the role that oil refineries played in water pollution and was sadly not too surprised to hear about the harm that they have on the environment/on people. Though the article briefly talked about the effects on aquatic life, I wonder how badly the pollution has impacted the surrounding aquatic environment and any other natural cycles. When reading through the section where the author focused on the effects on people of color, it reminded me of stories I would hear in my history classes. If you weren’t rich or caucasian, you usually had the short end of the stick and in this case, the short end is living near these polluted refineries. I feel grateful to live in an area where pollution doesn’t have an immediate impact on my life. Lastly, the article also talked about the EPA and its efforts to reduce pollution from refineries. Again, I was sadly not surprised when finding out that there have been little to no efforts in fixing this issue.