Sydney's main water source is severely polluted, and the metal content is seriously exceeded! Tap water in many places may be carcinogenic, containing large amounts of this chemical...
According to Australian media reports, a creek flowing through a pristine wetland in Sydney has been polluted for years.
But the environmental protection department has been
No protective action was taken.
The results of the water pollution investigators showed that there was a significant difference in water quality between the upstream of the stream and the polluted area.
The content of many metals in the pollution zone exceeds the standard.
It is reported that the cause of the pollution is an illegally operated garbage dump in Sydney.
The dump dumps a lot of pollutants such as asbestos debris.
Meanwhile, new research has found that Australian tap water is heavily contaminated with perfluoroalkyl sulfonates (PFAS).
Groundwater samples were found to contain more PFAS than drinking water standards in North America, but Australia has much more lenient restrictions on this chemical than in the United States and Canada.
This has attracted the attention of experts. One can't help but ask: Why?
Whether it's an ecological wetland or a tap water for drinking water, pollution is an issue that must be taken seriously.
Sydney's wetlands are heavily polluted
Close proximity to World Heritage listed protected areas
According to a well-known water expert, pollutants spilled from an illegal garbage dump in northern Sydney,
is causing a "major pollution incident".
Wheeny Creek is a creek located in New South Wales.
It is an important natural waterway in the region, flowing through a pristine wetland that provides a rich ecosystem and is home to a variety of wildlife, including platypus, frogs, herons and black swans.
In recent years, Wheeny Creek has attracted the attention of environmental groups and local residents due to pollution issues caused by illegal dumping of waste.
The NSW Environmental Protection Agency has been aware of the pollution risks of Wheeny Creek for many years.
In 2022, the agency said that "there is reason to suspect that a water pollution incident has occurred or is occurring",
But no attempt has been made to clean it up.
According to Ian Wright, a professor at Western Sydney University, preliminary tests have shown that
A protected wetland next to the dump site is "highly contaminated with a mixture of metals in concentrations known to be harmful to aquatic life".
The dump is believed to be the largest found in NSW, with an estimated 100,000 tonnes of dirty waste, including asbestos.
Allegedly, this is only part of the site used by the operators of the large-scale illegal dumping dumps.
These operators collect it for a fee
contaminated construction waste,
dumping it illegally without treatment,
Then pocket the fees.
Next to the dump, silt containing fragments of concrete, glass, bricks, ceramics and asbestos flows into the wetlands.
An oily sheen can be seen on the surface of the water.
The site is partly owned by Andrew Hughes, a member of an outlaw mob group.
Initial tests carried out this month revealed that many contaminants near the dumping site were well above the "trigger value".
This means that the location should be subject to further investigation or immediate action.
Undetectable aluminium content in the upper reaches of the stream,
But the aluminum content in the pollution zone is:
20 times the level of aquatic biosecurity.
polluted water,
The copper content is five times the "trigger value" level,
The zinc content is four times the limit,
The lead content is three times the limit,
The salinity of the water in the polluted zone is much higher than that upstream.
This is a deadly danger to the creatures that live in this body of water.
The EPA's attitude is inconsistent
To date, no protective action has been taken
In 2020, the EPA discovered that Hughes' company was dumping garbage at the site and issued a cleanup notice.
However, when it comes to water pollution, there are inconsistencies.
In a liquidation notice issued to Hughes in August 2022,
"There are reasonable suspicions about water pollution," the agency said
The incident has occurred or is occurring".
But in an email sent to outsiders in August 2023,
The agency said it believed
Water pollution is negligible.
In addition, according to Australian media reports, the Environmental Protection Bureau has not taken any action to protect the wetlands.
When asked why, the agency said it could not comment on the water pollution,
Because it's part of the court proceedings.
In NSW, the polluter pays principle applies, and the EPA says it will hold those responsible accountable.
Hughes is defending against six charges, including failure to comply with a cleanup notice.
It is reported that the EPA conducted a large-scale investigation of Wheeny Creek.
However, this secret investigation was pointed out by a senior internal investigator as a serious mismanagement.
For example, in the process of collecting evidence, the secret surveillance camera was dismantled, and there was a problem in the test to save money.
According to the investigators,
The scale of this pollution is huge,
The EPA should promote it
Level 1 land contamination allegations.
At present, the agency mainly adopts a lesser second-level charge.
Wright said the pollution incident appears to be continuing, with contaminants continuing to enter the wetlands and moving downstream to the Colo River.
What he was "puzzled" was:
Even simple remedial measures, such as placing sediment filters or securing barriers with hay bales to prevent contaminated waste from entering the waterways, were not taken.
"I think it's weird," he said. ”
Australia's tap water is polluted
High permanent chemical content
In addition to the severe pollution being suffered by the wetlands north of Sydney, tap water quality in many parts of Australia has also been severely warned.
Recently, tap water from Sydney, Newcastle, Canberra, Victoria, parts of Queensland, and the tourist resorts of Rottnest and Norfolk has been found to contain contaminants.
The contaminants are perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), which are known as "forever chemicals".
Due to the discovery of a large number of health problems that had never been detected before, the US authorities, as well as the WHO, have issued warnings:
These pollutants can cause cancer.
These two fluorides are widely used in water-repellent coatings and firefighting foams, because they are difficult to degrade in the environment and accumulate in living organisms, including the human body, hence the name "permanent chemicals".
Long-term exposure to it has many potential health risks, and in addition to being carcinogenic, it can also affect a person's immune system, reproductive and developmental systems, etc.
For the past decade, the Australian federal government has been defending its class action lawsuit for the use of the chemical in firefighting foams.
and deny these chemicals
It can have a "significant" impact on health.
Within weeks of the Federal Court's expert umpire finding that there was conclusive evidence that the chemicals could cause harmful health effects, including carcinogenicity, the federal government reached the first settlements with 11 communities worth $366 million.
However, in the past year,
in Sydney, Newcastle as well
In some other areas, tap water is even
Dangerous amounts of PFAS were detected.
In some affected areas, the water supply system has even ceased to function.
In April, the U.S. announced a maximum limit of 4 trillion for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water, saying it was the minimum target that water providers could realistically implement.
At the same time, U.S. environmental agencies say water suppliers must work towards zero pollution goals.
Because there is no such thing as being wrong with health
The level of contamination that caused the impact.
In other words, as long as the water contains these two chemicals, it will definitely have an impact on human health, and the difference is only a difference in degree.
However, Australia's drinking water standards set in 2018 allow PFOA levels of 560/trillion and PFOS levels of 70/trillion.
This is much higher than the feasible standards set by the United States.
Australian media contacted all 23 affected Australian drinking water suppliers, and the responses were:
Their water is safe,
Because the detected level is compliant
Australian Drinking Water Standards.
The problem is that Australia's drinking water standards are several times higher than the latest safety standards of the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Is it true that people living in Australia are physically more able to withstand the damage of these two types of fluoride than people living in North America?
But Nicholas Chatters, a senior research fellow at the University of Sydney's School of Medicine and Health, said the chemicals posed an equally big health threat to Australians and Americans.
Due to the rapid development of the situation, changes in overseas standards have in turn forced the Australian government to take action to re-examine the content standards for PFAS.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Health said the guidelines would be based on "the best available scientific evidence" and would ensure consumer safety once implemented.
Impression Conclusion
According to the analysis of Australian experts, the latest implementation standards issued by the United States are very difficult.
But for substances like "forever chemicals", the problem is that they persist so that they continue to accumulate after entering the body.
Over time, the concentration slowly gets higher, and that's when the problem comes.
In view of the serious pollution of the wetlands in northern Sydney, it is also hoped that the government can divert the energy of the busy litigation and take some immediate and practical measures to protect the wetlands.
Once the natural ecology is destroyed, even if a lot of time and money are spent, it is very likely that it will not be fully restored.
And natural ecology is what Australia is most proud of.
Whether it is the quality of drinking water or the pollution of protected and rare wetlands, it is a huge loss for people living in Australia, and the damage caused is difficult to remedy.
Comprehensive sources: ABC, SMH, etc