Saturday, February 28, 2015

Bottled Water.... Why You Should Think Twice Before Drinking It!

Think bottled water is a good idea? Think again! If you read this blog post and all the information on it (and watch all the videos) you will clearly see why bottled water is a bad, bad idea. It's bad for the environment, and it's bad for YOU. Bottled water is highly acidic, unregulated, and often contains a lot of toxins!  If you don't believe me, take a look at the rest of this webpage. This video below will show you how acidic (oxidizing) bottled water really is.



Check out THIS bottled water report by the NRDC. It is a real eye opener. You will see, for example, that one gallon of Lady Lee "drinking water" has 91 parts per billion of Total Trihalomethanes. This amount is FOUR TIMES HIGHER than the amount that's shown to cause death from bladder cancer, in a Taiwanese study (many other countries have reported similar findings).

 Then check out EWG's Bottled Water Scorecard... another eye opener. Most bottled water companies rate an "F" when it comes to transparency. The truth is, many of them they don't really WANT you to know that much about their water! They often don't have any information showing how you can see a water quality report (to see what's in their water)

A plastic bottle just isn't a good container to store water in, period. Any type of plastic, including BPA-Free plastic, can change estrogen levels and leach toxic chemicals into the water.  I once worked with a woman who was recovering from cancer. We ordered lunch and she said she could not eat anything that was out of a styrofoam container because her doctor had her on a cancer-prevention protocol, which meant she had to get rid of plastic in every form. She couldn't use plastic plates, silverware, or bottles.  Even Dr. Mercola recommends getting rid of plastic if you are trying to recover from cancer.

Also keep in mind that bottled water is often just filtered tap water, put in a bottle. Dr. Mercola notes on this page how an independent test performed by the Environmental Working Group in 2009 revealed 38 low-level contaminants in bottled water, with each of the 10 tested brands containing an average of eight chemicals, including disinfection byproducts, caffeine, tylenol, nitrate, industrial chemicals, arsenic and bacteria.  

Furthermore, many bottled water companies do not disclose where the water comes from. You can see a list of hundreds of bottled water companies, most of which had a D or F rating from the Environmental Working Group, for failing to disclose their sources and treatment methods. 


From Dr. Mercola's site:

Ditched Water Bottles Are Destroying the Environment
Bottled water is perhaps one of the most environmentally unfriendly industries there is. Americans consume about half a billion bottles of water every week! The environmental ramifications of this practice are enormous.  



This info is originally from this page:



  • Every square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of floating plastic.
  • A plastic bottle can take hundreds of years to break down – and even then, its particles don’t just disappear.
  • Over time, plastic breaks down into smaller pieces that can contaminate our soil, animals, and waterways.
  • Animals often mistake these plastic pieces for food. Once the plastic gets into their systems, these pieces can poison the animal and often lead to its death.
  • 26 billion water bottles are thrown away each year.
  • Only 1/5 of these are recycled.
Plastic is the world’s greatest source of pollution and water bottles make up the largest portion of the plastic in landfills today. As you may know, plastic does not degrade quickly, and may be harming our soil and animals. Plastic particles have even been linked to human health issues, as when we eat fish, for example, we often consume everything the fish has been exposed to – including chemicals leached from plastics. Even though the world has steadily gained more knowledge about recycling, today, most bottles still end up in landfills.Many times, bottled water companies promote their products by telling consumers that bottled water is “purer” and “safer” than tap water. However the regulations surrounding the distribution of tap water are much stricter than the regulations on bottled water companies. Additionally, multiple independent research groups have found that many bottled waters originally came from the tap, and many other brands contain higher levels of contaminants than are permitted at municipal levels.Americans consume enough bottled water to circle the equator, with bottles stacked from end to end. This happens every 27 days. 26 billion bottles are thrown away every year (only 20 percent of which are recycled). It can take 200 or more years for a bottle to break down in a landfill. 

Bottled Water & Waste

Together, these reasons already provide good incentives to reduce your use of bottled water. But read on – there’s more.

Bottled Water & Pollution

  • To make 1 bottle of water, 3 times that amount of water is wasted in production.
  • 17 million barrels of oil per year are used in production of bottled water. For reference, this amount of oil could fuel 1 million cars for a year.
  • Water bottles not only need to be produced, but also shipped around the world. Transporting these bottles by means of train, truck, ship, and plane additionally add to air pollution.
Producing bottled water is undeniably detrimental to the environment. Not only do the factories that produce these plastic bottles emit tons of carbon emissions into the atmosphere, but once the bottles are filled, transporting them releases even more carbon dioxide into the air.

Bottled Water & Cleanliness

  • Municipal water plants have stricter regulations on the quality of the water than bottled water companies.
  • The Natural Resource Defense Counsel did a 4-year review on bottled water and found that: 22% of the tested brands contained chemical contaminants at levels above those mandated by the stateand 40%of the tested brands were taken originally from tap water.
The True Cost of Bottled Water
  • On average, bottled water costs about $10 per gallon.
  • Tap water costs less than $0.01 per gallon.
  • Do the math: Bottled water is, on average, 1,000 times more expensive than tap water!
As you can see, bottled water is way more expensive than tap water, and switching from bottled water to tap will save you money. Even if you don’t care about the environmental effects, it’s hard to ignore the potential cost savings here.

What You Can Do to Help

Now that you know about the known and potential hazards of bottled water, you’re probably wondering what you can do to protect our environment and reap the cost savings. Here are a few simple tasks to help you save money, reduce your carbon footprint, reduce waste in our oceans and soil, and help prevent animals from ingesting harmful plastics:
  • If you are concerned about the cleanliness of your tap water, buy a filter for your sink or buy a pitcher that filters the water for you.
  • Instead of using disposable water bottles, buy a reusable water bottle. There are many types out there such as stainless steel, aluminum, BPA-free plastic, and glass. Find one that best fits your needs.
  • If and when you do have to use disposable water bottles, make sure to recycle them.
  • Finally, share this new knowledge with others around you and encourage them to make these simple changes with you. After all, it’s easier to make a change when your friends are supporting you!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to see How Bottled Water REALLY rates? CLICK HERE to see the Environmental Working Goup's Bottled Water Scorecard. 

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/01/21/best-and-worst-bottled-water-brands.aspx

From this page:

A report by Food And Water Watch says 

that almost half of all bottled water is derived

 from tap water

Flickr - enorMay or may not be your bottled water source
47.8% (in 2009), to be exact.
Heavy hitters like Pepsi's Aquafina (in 2001, 13 percent of the market) and Nestle Pure Life were forced to change their labels a few years ago to accurately describe where their water came from: public water sources.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/facts-bottled-water-industry-2011-10?op=1#ixzz3T1YFos20


15 Outrageous Facts About The Bottled Water Industry

  •  
  • 7/16
  •  
Tap water -- which is EPA regulated -- 

undergoes testing for e. coli, is required to 

provide its source and produce quality reports

Bottled water, on the other hand, doesn't have to meet any of those standards to be distributed.
Additionally, the Food and Drug Administration regulates bottled water and its standards pale in comparison to the EPA's for the tap. A few examples of this include: less frequent bacteria testing, no mandatory reports of violations to federal officials, and no filtration or disinfection requirements on the federal level (while many states have no meaningful programs of their own).

In scientific testing, bottled water was found 

to be no safer than tap water

According to the National Resources Defense Council, most bottled water is of good quality. But does that make it better than tap water? The most recent tests by the NRDC tested 103 bottled waters and showed the following:
  • Nearly one in five tested waters contained, in at least one sample, more bacteria than allowed under microbiological-purity "guidelines"
  • Four waters (4 percent) violated the generally weak federal bottled water standards (two for excessive fluoride and two for excessive coliform bacteria
  • In eight cases arsenic was found in at least one test at a level of potential health concern.
In conclusion: "...there is no assurance that bottled water is any safer than tap water."


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/facts-bottled-water-industry-2011-10?op=1#ixzz3T1YSwCFB


In taste tests, tap water consistently ranks 

at or above the level of bottled water

The production of water bottles uses 17 million

barrels of oil a year, and it takes three times 

the water to make the bottle as it does to fill it

For a product that claims to be environmentally responsible, the bottled water industry does more than its fair share of planet trashing. The amount of oil used to make a year's worth of bottles could fill one million cars for a year, and more water is used in making the bottle than filling it

Of the 30 billion plastic water bottles sold in the 

United States in 2005, only 12 percent were 

recycled.

According to Doug James, a professor of computer science and computer graphics at Cornell University and a recycling advocate, that left 25 billion bottles "landfilled, littered or incinerated."
And recycled bottle plastic can only be re-used in non-food products.
Essentially, there is no way for bottled water to be as environmentally responsible as tap water.  

The 2011 global forecast called for over 

$86 billion in profits

risager on flickr




That includes sparkling flavored water, sparkling unflavored water, still flavored water and still unflavored water. A very impressive number considering a similar product comes basically free from the kitchen sink.

The videos below are shown to simply demonstrate the reality and negative impact of bottled water. Bottled water is terrible for the environment. But please note that some of these videos below claim that tap water is safe to drink, and have proven that it "tested clean" for bacteria and other micro organisms. However, they videos do not show testing for toxic chemicals in the water (which may or may not be removed by EITHER the bottled water or the tap water). Please go to www.EWG.org/tap-water  to determine whether your tap water has had toxic chemicals in it, and ask for a water report from your water supply company. 

















This was pretty darn funny so I had to post it!

Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Hexavalent Chromium (the "Erin Brockovich" chemical)... What you should know

I think the water companies we have in the United States do a great job of filtering and cleaning our water, given the budget they have to work with. But I do believe that it is VERY important that ALL Americans become aware of what is in their drinking water, and in particular, whether they have high levels of Hexavalent Chromium (anything above .02 parts per billion). For anyone who thinks, "They'd tell us if there was something wrong with our water" (like I used to think).... Please think again.

Water companies are regulated by EPA guidelines, which are currently DRASTICALLY OUT OF DATE. For several decades, the LEGAL LIMIT for hexavalent chromium (a KNOWN carcinogen made famous in the movie Erin Brockovich) in our water was 5,000 times higher than what the California EPA (aka the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment) says it should be (click here to see the proof). It has been adjusted so that now it is "only" 500 times what the California EPA says it should be. It could be decades before the EPA guidelines are adjusted to meet the California guidelines, so you must take it upon yourself to find out the facts, learn what is in your water, and know what the health effects are!

Again... I know the water departments work very hard to filter toxins out of the water and I admire them for all they do. It is truly amazing how clean they ARE able to get the water, given how many contaminants it starts out with. But there are still many places that were reported by the Environmental Working Group and other agencies to have 1 and 25 parts per billion, of this toxic chemical. For anyone who doesn't think that sounds like a lot... like I didn't... the birth control NuvaRing is active at just 0.035 parts per billion. Albuterol (which can stop an asthma attack) is effective at 2.1 parts per billion.

San Jose, Mountain View, Livermore and other cities in the bay area have levels of Hexavalent Chromium that are considered WELL above the "California health recommendation" for what is considered safe.  Mountain View was reported by The Environmental Working Group to have .48 - 1.9 PPB.  San Jose was measured at 3.82 - 5.7 PPB.  Livermore was reported to have 4.2  PPB, though a news report I watched said it got as high as 11 PPB in one area (watch the video called "The Cost of Cleaning up Chromium 6, further down the page). There are many others. You can see a list I made, of some levels of Hexavalent Chromium, in different California cities, by clicking HERE.

In my opinion, we shouldn't wait for the EPA and the water companies to clean the water for us. Why? Because if they really did get it down to a TRULY SAFE level (.02 parts per billion) our water would cost about 4 times more (you can see it explained in "The Cost of Cleaning up Chromium 6" - just scroll down).

Because we only drink about 5 to 10% of our water (vs. flushing the toilet, watering the yard, etc) it seems to me that the most cost effective method is HOME FILTRATION. Protect yourself and protect your family, and don't wait (and hope) for the government to fix the problem for us, because NOBODY wants to see an increase in our taxes, to filter 90 percent of water that people don't even drink.

This information below was originally from THIS PAGE:

Chromium-6 is highly toxic and has been found to cause allergic dermatitis, and stomach and gastrointestinal cancer in animals and humans. Used in the manufacture of stainless steel, textiles, anticorrosion coatings, and in leather tanning, it gets into drinking water through industrial pollution. It is also present naturally in some minerals.

Note from Ualani: Gastrointestinal cancer can include the following: Esophageal cancer, stomach cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, gallbladder cancer, colorectal cancer, anal cancer, and Gastrointestinal carcinoid tumors.

After the National Toxicology Program found that chromium-6 caused cancer in rats and mice in 2008, California proposed the establishment of a statewide legal limit of 0.06 parts per billion (ppb) of chromium-6 in drinking water. On December 31, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment of the California Environmental Protection Agency revised its proposed limit to .02 ppb because of new findings about the vulnerability of young children and sensitive populations to chromium-6 exposure.
-----------------------------------------
Currently, the EPA has the limit for ALL types of chromium, set at 100 parts per billion. However there is a HUGE difference between HEXAVALENT chromium (a known carcinogen) and Trivalent Chromium (which is generally considered safe at much higher levels). 

The groundwater in Hinkley, CA (the place where the famous Erin Brockovich movie was filmed), is STILL not cleaned up. It is very expensive and time consuming to clean up Hexavalent Chromium. Many people assume that the levels of Hexavalent Chromium in Hinkley were extremely high. 

Update 10/13/17:
I just saw the following regarding how much chromium 6 was actually in the water, and need to verify this for accuracy, but this is the first time I'm seeing that the level was well over the legal limit. The things I'd seen previously, are highlighted below the new findings, in pink.

------------------------


New findings (what I just saw personally). I realized that this part about the level being 580 PPB was not on the page about "Hinkley Groundwater Contamination".... it is only printed on the page about Hexavalent Chromium.... go figure. 
Hinkley[edit]
Hexavalent chromium was found in drinking water in the southern California town of Hinkley and was brought to popular attention by the involvement of Erin Brockovich and Attorney Edward Masry. The source of contamination was from the evaporating ponds of a PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric) natural gas pipeline Compressor Station located approximately 2 miles southeast of Hinkley. Between 1952 and 1966, chromium(VI) was used to prevent corrosion in the cooling stacks. The wastewater was then dumped into the unlined evaporating ponds. As a result, the chromium(VI) leaked into the groundwater source.[43] The 580 ppb chromium(VI) in the groundwater in Hinkley exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 100 ppb for total chromium currently set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[44] It also exceeded the California MCL of 50 ppb (as of November 2008) for all types of chromium.[45] California first established an MCL specifically for hexavalent chromium in 2014, set at 10 ppb.[13] Prior to that only total chromium standards applied.
A more recent study found that from 1996 to 2008, 196 cancers were identified among residents of the census tract that included Hinkley — a slightly lower number than the 224 cancers that would have been expected given its demographic characteristics.[46][47][48] In June 2013 Mother Jones published an article regarding work by the Center for Public Integrity that was critical of the study, and some others by the same researcher, John Morgan. This comes in contrast with the conclusions reached by the EPA and California’s Department of Public Health that chromium(VI) does in fact cause cancer.[49]
At the time that a PG&E background study of chromium(VI) was conducted, average chromium(VI) levels in Hinkley were recorded as 1.19 ppb with a peak of 3.09 ppb. The PG&E Topock Compressor Station averaged 7.8ppb and peaked at 31.8ppb. The California MCL standard was still at 50 ppb at the completion of this background study.[50] In comparison, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of the California EPA, proposed a health goal of 0.06 ppb of chromium(VI) in drinking water in 2009.[51] In 2010, Erin Brockovich returned to Hinkley in the midst of claims that the plume was spreading, despite PG&E cleanup efforts.[52] PG&E continues to provide bottled watered for the residents of Hinkley as well as offer to buy their homes. All other ongoing cleanup documentation is maintained at California EPA's page.[43]
------------------------------------


What I previously wrote:

I've seen that the AVERAGE amount of hexavalent chromium in the Hinkley drinking water, at the time of the lawsuit, was just 1.19 parts per billion (I am doing further research to verify the accuracy of this number, but I keep seeing 1.19 on several sites). Reportedly, Hinkley water did have a peak as high as 20 parts per billion... but the reported AVERAGE was just 1.19 (The current hexavalent levels are higher in San Jose and Hawaii!!).  This is what it currently says on Wikipedia.

Average hexavalent chromium levels in Hinkley were recorded as 1.19 parts-per-billion (ppb) with an estimated peak of 20 ppb. The PG&E Topock Compressor Station averaged 7.8 ppb and peaks at 31.8 ppb based on the PG&E Background Study.[2] The proposed California health goal for hexavalent chromium is 0.02 ppb.[3]

The US EPA sets the regulatory limit of hexavalent chromium at 100ppb.

PG&E was recently cited for providing Hinkley residents with bottled water that contained levels of Chromium 6 which were just 0.14 parts per billion (Mountain View, CA, has had 10x that, and other places in California have been shown to have 100 times that amount)! OK so it's true, the Hinkley residents are a little sensitive about Chromium levels, so they had previously been able to get PG&E, long ago, to agree to give them water that had no more than 0.06 parts per billion of Hexavalent Chromium in it. That's why PG&E was cited. But still... these folks are pretty well versed on how toxic the stuff is. You can read the article HERE.

More from THIS PAGE:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has classified chromium-6 as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans” when ingested through drinking water in a draft review of the chemical, but it does not require water utilities to test for it nor has it established safe legal limits for the chemical.


to find out what level of Hexavalent Chromium was in your water, as reported by the Environmental Working group, for the years 2004-2009 (call your water department for the latest findings, or better yet... get it tested yourself!).  Type in your zip code the top of the page, then choose the water company in your area. 


Please look for BOTH the readings for "Total Chromium," AND also "Chromium (hexavalent)"... scroll down to see a photo of how it will appear. You will probably find it closer to the bottom of the report because it won't be listed as being over the legal limit. Because the EPA doesn't necessarily distinguish between different types of chromium (and has set the total limit for ALL types of chromium, combined, as 100 parts per billion... yes that's really true!) you should look at BOTH readings. Many water companies DO NOT BOTHER TO TEST FOR HEXAVALENT CHROMIUM (they just test for "total chromium"). You can see for yourself by checking out my page that lists the readings for several different cities in California (you will notice how many counties have "Not listed" in their water report because the data for Chromium 6 simply wasn't provided).
CLICK HERE TO SEE IT.

Please note that this info on the EWG website is from the years 2004-2009 so you may want to also call your water dept for the latest report. The level in your water could be higher or lower, and it can vary from neighborhood to neighborhood.



More from THIS PAGE:

In its tests, EWG found that 25 of the cities tested had levels of chromium-6 higher than California’s original proposed limit of .06 ppb; now all 31 cities with chromium-tainted water have levels higher than California’s new proposed limit of .02 ppb. The highest levels of chromium-6 were found in Norman, OK which measured 12.9 ppb; Honolulu, HI with 2.00 ppb; Riverside, CA at 1.69 ppb; Madison, WI at 1.58 ppb; and San Jose, CA which measured 1.34 ppb. The utilities that service the 31 cities whose tap water contained chromium-6 provide water to over 26 million people.

And in fact, EWG believes the actual number of people drinking chromium-6 contaminated tap water is much larger. According to its 2009 analysis of drinking water, 74 million people drink tap water polluted with “total chromium.” Total chromium includes trivalent chromium (which occurs naturally in many vegetables, fruits, meats, grains and yeast), as well as the toxic chromium-6.  Preliminary tests have found that most of the total chromium in water is chromium-6, yet the EPA’s legal limit for total chromium is 100 ppb—5,000 times higher than California’s new proposed limit for chromium-6.

The info below is from THIS PAGE:

Hexavalent Chromium

The Dangers of Hexavalent Chromium (Chromium 6) in California Drinking Water
Map of wells in California with detected hexavalent chromium
On April 15, 2014, the California Department of Public Health (DPH)released the final hexavalent chromium drinking water standard of 10 parts per billion (ppb).  In addition to being 10 years late, the standard is  500 times higher than the level that State scientists have determined would not result in significant public health problems.  In addition, since the vast majority of contaminated water sources have less than 10 ppb, only 15% (or less) will receive treatment.  That means that 85% of the contaminated sources will not be treated and potentially millions of Californians will continue to be exposed to unsafe levels of this carcinogen.  This is a significant point as DPH ‘s decision was primarily based on the costs of water treatment, despite the State’s health related analysis.
Because the public would bear the costs of potential illness, while polluters would not be held accountable, Clean Water Action pushed for a more health protective drinking water standard. While disappointed with the final regulation we were, with our members’ support, able to prevent DPH from proposing an even weaker standard. We also worked with the Governor’s office to move the drinking water program to the State Water Resources Control Board (scheduled for later this year), where it will be more integrated with other water protection programs and funding sources.  This move provides the opportunity to explore how we can best reform the ways we establish drinking water regulations in order to achieve the best results.

You can read a report (pictured below) by the California Environmental Protection Agency, on Hexavalent Chromium by CLICKING HERE. 

 

Background on Hexavalent Chromium in California

The movie Erin Brockovich alerted the public to the great suffering the little town of Hinkley experienced due to hexavalent chromium in their drinking water. Today, Hinkley is little more than a ghost town thanks to continued water contamination, health concerns, and plummeting property values.  While the levels in most other impacted communities are much lower than Hinkley’s,  hexavalent chromium has been detected in 2475 California drinking water sources. These sources are spread throughout 51 out of 58 counties.
In order to protect public health, the California Legislature passed SB 351 (Ortiz) in 2001, requiring the development of a state drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium by January 2004. Despite this legal deadline, it took an additional 10 years to finalize the regulation.
Chromium occurs in the environment largely in two forms: trivalent chromium (chromium 3), which is an essential human nutrient, and hexavalent chromium (chromium 6), which is the most toxic form of the element. Currently, chromium is regulated in drinking water as total chromium and the California drinking water standard of 50 parts per billion measures the amount of both toxic (hexavalent) and non- or less-toxic (trivalent) chromium in the water. Basing the standard on the combined levels of both types of chromium does not adequately protect public health because hexavalent chromium is more toxic at much lower levels than the other form. A combined standard leaves the public vulnerable to health effects from hexavalent chromium.
What are the health effects of hexavalent chromium?
Hexavalent chromium is a carcinogen and a reproductive toxicant for both males and females. As a result, it was added to California's Proposition 65 list of toxic substances (pdf) in December 2008. Exposure to hexavalent chromium occurs through breathing, ingestion, and contact with the skin. Although most of the known health impacts are related to inhalation, there is now strong data linking ingestion of hexavalent chromium, such as through drinking water, to severe health effects. In addition to cancer and reproductive harm, short and long-term exposures can lead to eye and respiratory irritation, asthma attacks, nasal ulcers, dermal burns, anemia, acute gastroenteritis, vertigo, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, convulsions, ulcers, and damage or failure of the liver and kidneys. 
------------

On September 16, 2011, the California EPA proposed an amendment to the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, California code of Regulations, section 25707(b), Proposition 65.  You can see the full document by CLICKING HERE.



Is it just me, or does it seem funny that asbestos is still considered safe to ingest... 
but hexavalent chromium is NOT! 
(yes I do realize oral exposure is very 
different from inhalation but... it still sounds funny).



Please, people. Look this stuff up for yourself because I really don't want to believe what I'm reading (please contact me if you can find info that truly disputes the fact many Californians are being exposed to very high levels of Chromium 6, that are unsafe... I will be HAPPY to update this blog!!!). 


LOW DOSES DO MATTER!

This is the video where learned that low doses really do matter. You can scroll to 9:40 to see the part where Ken Cook, the president of EWG, mentions that even very low parts per billion can be effective. Paxil and Cialis are active at 30 parts per billion. NUVA RING, a common birth control, is active at just 0.035 parts per billion.  Hexavalent Chromium, a known carcinogen, is found in many places in California, at between .3 parts per billion, and 11 parts per billion. 


EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD WATCH THESE VIDEOS BELOW (at least the first 5). The quality of your water is serious business, people. You deserve to know what's in your water!! 

  



PS I want to give thanks to brave people like Roberta Walker and Erin Brockovich for all the hard work they have done to make sure the Hinkley community is safe (and that companies like PG&E can stay on their toes)!  For anyone who doesn't know this, Roberta Walker is the woman who started investigating the levels of chromium in the water in Hinkley, when she knew it was causing health problems!












Please note that the amounts detected in the chart below have been reported to be higher in some cases. I've seen news stories that show certain places in California (like Livermore) can have up to 11 parts per billion, and in San Jose it was estimated that it's between 1 and 7 parts per billion. 


(update from me):

I just saw that Dixon, California, had an average at one point, of 25 parts per billion of Chromium 6 in their water, and the LA Department of Water and Power reported levels that were up to as high as 33.7 parts per billion). 

Please note that these areas may have been cleaned up by now (see this article) but I am still concerned about the effects some of the residents in these areas may be experiencing from long term exposure to this toxic chemical. Even the new legal guideline (10 parts per billion) is WELL ABOVE what the California EPA says is safe!! Again.... the AVERAGE level of Chromium 6 in Hinkley, CA, the town that developed serious health issues and sued PG&E, was 1.19 parts per billion (this is according to Wikipedia and every other source I could find online...if someone could possibly provide me with information that shows it was higher than this, I would love to see it and be able to relax, but that is the figure I keep seeing over and over).


Please be sure to watch the video above called "The Cost of Cleaning up Chromium 6."

The chart below was from THIS PAGE.





 UPDATE 10/13/17 I just found this and thought I should put it here... from Wikipedia... this is the first time I'm seeing that there was a level of 580 ppb of Chromium 6, found in Hinkley water. 

Hinkley[edit]
Hexavalent chromium was found in drinking water in the southern California town of Hinkley and was brought to popular attention by the involvement of Erin Brockovich and Attorney Edward Masry. The source of contamination was from the evaporating ponds of a PG&E (Pacific Gas and Electric) natural gas pipeline Compressor Station located approximately 2 miles southeast of Hinkley. Between 1952 and 1966, chromium(VI) was used to prevent corrosion in the cooling stacks. The wastewater was then dumped into the unlined evaporating ponds. As a result, the chromium(VI) leaked into the groundwater source.[43] The 580 ppb chromium(VI) in the groundwater in Hinkley exceeded the Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 100 ppb for total chromium currently set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[44] It also exceeded the California MCL of 50 ppb (as of November 2008) for all types of chromium.[45] California first established an MCL specifically for hexavalent chromium in 2014, set at 10 ppb.[13] Prior to that only total chromium standards applied.
A more recent study found that from 1996 to 2008, 196 cancers were identified among residents of the census tract that included Hinkley — a slightly lower number than the 224 cancers that would have been expected given its demographic characteristics.[46][47][48] In June 2013 Mother Jones published an article regarding work by the Center for Public Integrity that was critical of the study, and some others by the same researcher, John Morgan. This comes in contrast with the conclusions reached by the EPA and California’s Department of Public Health that chromium(VI) does in fact cause cancer.[49]
At the time that a PG&E background study of chromium(VI) was conducted, average chromium(VI) levels in Hinkley were recorded as 1.19 ppb with a peak of 3.09 ppb. The PG&E Topock Compressor Station averaged 7.8ppb and peaked at 31.8ppb. The California MCL standard was still at 50 ppb at the completion of this background study.[50] In comparison, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) of the California EPA, proposed a health goal of 0.06 ppb of chromium(VI) in drinking water in 2009.[51] In 2010, Erin Brockovich returned to Hinkley in the midst of claims that the plume was spreading, despite PG&E cleanup efforts.[52] PG&E continues to provide bottled watered for the residents of Hinkley as well as offer to buy their homes. All other ongoing cleanup documentation is maintained at California EPA's page.[43]


I have to say, this video I just saw, regarding PG&E's remediation program, is pretty impressive:



You can see a whole site about Hinkley's groundwater remediation program, HERE:

http://www.hinkleygroundwater.com/