Showing posts with label Plants as Water Protectors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Plants as Water Protectors. Show all posts

Friday, February 24, 2023

Phyto Rafts Water Pollution CleanUP

 Plants as Water Protectors Phytoremediation Raft Design by Scotty



Phytoremediation Raft Design by Scotty


THE POLLUTION SOLUTION SPECIALIZES IN TECHNIQUES AND SERVICES FOR NATURALLY INSPIRED AND COST EFFECTIVE REMOVAL AND REMEDIATION OF TOXINS AND CONTAMINANTS FROM AIR, SOIL, AND WATER.
We are The Pollution Solution



Wednesday, January 25, 2023

EPA Announces Latest Actions to Protect Groundwater and Communities from Coal Ash Contamination


Agency issues six proposed determinations to deny facilities’ requests to continue unsafe coal ash disposal Issued: Jan 25, 2023 (2:29pm EST)

WASHINGTON (Jan. 25, 2023) – Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the latest action to protect communities and hold facilities accountable for controlling and cleaning up the contamination created by coal ash disposal. The Agency issued six proposed determinations to deny facilities’ requests to continue disposing of coal combustion residuals (CCR or coal ash) into unlined surface impoundments.

For a seventh facility that has withdrawn its application, Apache Generating Station in Cochise, Arizona, EPA issued a letter identifying concerns with deficiencies in its liner components and groundwater monitoring program.

“With today’s proposed denials, EPA is holding facilities accountable and protecting our precious water resources from harmful contamination, all while ensuring a reliable supply of electricity to our communities,” said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan. “We remain committed to working with our state partners to protect everyone, especially those in communities overburdened by pollution, from coal ash contamination now and into the future.” 

Coal ash is a byproduct of burning coal in coal-fired power plants that, without proper management, can pollute waterways, groundwater, drinking water, and the air. Coal ash contains contaminants like mercury, cadmium, chromium, and arsenic associated with cancer and various other serious health effects.

Today’s action delivers protections for underserved communities already overburdened by pollution, and reflects the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to advancing environmental justice in impacted communities.

EPA is proposing to deny the applications for continued use of unlined surface impoundments at the following six facilities:

 

  • Belle River Power Plant, China Township, Michigan.
  • Coal Creek Station, Underwood, North Dakota.
  • Conemaugh Generating Station, New Florence, Pennsylvania.
  • Coronado Generating Station, St. Johns, Arizona.
  • Martin Lake Steam Electric Station, Tatum, Texas.
  • Monroe Power Plant, Monroe, Michigan.

 

EPA is proposing to deny these applications because the owners and operators of the CCR units fail to demonstrate that the surface impoundments comply with requirements of the CCR regulations. Specifically, EPA is proposing to deny these applications due to:

 

  • Inadequate groundwater monitoring networks.
  • Failure to prove groundwater is monitored to detect and characterize any elevated levels of contaminants coming from the coal ash surface impoundment.
  • Evidence of potential releases from the impoundments and insufficient information to support claims that the contamination is from sources other than the impoundments.
  • Inadequate documentation for the design and performance of the impoundment liners.
  • Failure to meet all location restrictions.

 

If EPA finalizes these denials, the facilities will have to either stop sending waste to these unlined impoundments or submit applications to EPA for extensions to the deadline for unlined coal ash surface impoundments to stop receiving waste.

In the significant interest of maintaining grid reliability, the Agency is also proposing a process for these facilities to seek additional time, if needed to address demonstrated grid reliability issues. This process relies in part on reliability assessments from the relevant regional transmission organizations, ensuring a reliable supply of electricity while protecting public health.
EPA is collecting public comments on these proposals for 30 days through dockets in Regulations.gov. For more information, visit the Part B implementation webpage.

Background
The CCR Part B Final Rule, published November 12, 2020, allowed facilities to demonstrate to EPA that, based on groundwater data and the design of a particular surface impoundment, the operation of the unit has and will continue to ensure there is no reasonable probability of adverse effects to human health and the environment. EPA approval would allow the unit to continue to operate.

EPA received applications for alternate liner demonstrations from eight facilities with 17 CCR surface impoundments. These applications were from facilities in Arizona, Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas. One Arizona facility and the Louisiana facility have since withdrawn their applications.

Learn more about coal ash

For further information: EPA Press Office (press@epa.gov)

Wednesday, August 3, 2022

Radiation Testing Contract StLouis FUSRAP






Friday, April 26, 2019

Trees Shrubs as Farm Buffer Zones

Trees and Shrubs growing along the edge of fields act as Farm Buffer Zones and clean farm runoff which protect streams and waterways from toxins and pollutants

RIPARIAN FOREST BUFFERS are trees, shrubs, and grasses located next to rivers, streams, and lakes to help protect aquatic resources by filtering farm runoff and preventing erosion. Buffer areas can support wildlife habitat, produce crops, improve water quality, and reduce flood damage.


Riparian Forest Buffer
Riparian forest buffers are natural or re-established streamside forests made up of tree, shrub, and grass plantings. They buffer non-point source pollution of waterways from adjacent land, reduce bank erosion, protect aquatic environments, enhance wildlife, and increase biodiversity.USDA

Tools



Add Trees to the Plants as Water Protectors 

Tuesday, April 16, 2019

Funding Available for Water-Quality Stations that Measure Effectiveness of Conservation Systems on Farms


The USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is making $2 million available to interested farmers to help install voluntary edge-of-field monitoring stations on agricultural land in five states, including Missouri. COLUMBIA, MO, April 16, 2019 – 

Missouri Banner

“Edge-of-field water quality monitoring provides quantifiable data that supports voluntary-based conservation efforts aimed at reducing the movement of sediment and nutrients off Missouri farms,” State Conservationist J.R. Flores said.

Through edge-of-field monitoring, NRCS works with farmers and conservation partners, such as universities and non-governmental organizations, to monitor the amount of nutrients and sediment in water runoff from a field. The data from different conservation systems, and from field with no conservation systems in place, are evaluated to judge effectiveness of the systems. Conservation practices typically evaluated include cover crops, no till, irrigation water management, and practices to reduce and trap nutrients and sediment.

Monitoring stations enable NRCS to measure at the edge of farm fields rather than try to estimate conservation effects from in-stream measurements that are subject to influences outside of the farmer’s control. Edge-of-field monitoring, combined with instream monitoring, can provide a more thorough picture of improvements within a watershed.

NRCS first introduced edge-of-field monitoring in 2011. Since then 19 stations have been in operation in Missouri. Generally, they have shown that conservation practices work best when they are part of an overall system. They also show the importance of having live plants growing during the winter. Flores said the stations have been showing that winter cash crops or cover crops reduce pollutant loading up to 30 percent.

Funding is available on a voluntary basis to farmers in 116 Missouri watersheds. It pays for the costs of installing, maintaining and monitoring the stations for up to nine years. Farmers can check with the NRCS office in their county to see if they are eligible. The results of data collected will be maintained confidentially for farmers’ use and for use by the conservation partners responsible for monitoring.

Farmers interested in applying for financial assistance should submit applications by July 15 to their local NRCS office. To locate an NRCS service center near you, visit the “contact us” section of the website, or look in the telephone directory under, “U.S. Government, Department of Agriculture.”

Contact: George Henshaw, Assistant State Conservationist for Programs
Phone: 573-876-0901
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Sunday, February 17, 2019

StL Plants As Water Protectors

Recently I was in a suburb of StLouis City and happened across this 3 Basin Water Pollution and Filtration setup that cleans pollution from water runoff from a stlouis city street and building parking lots.


Bioremediation and Phytoremediation are the 2 forms of water pollution filtration and cleanup used in this real life St.Louis example. The microbes are the workhorses with this bioremediation system.

A site inspection revealed a 3 level catch basin design. Each catch basin draining into the "downhill" basin below. Each water catch basin also appears to be geared for different contaminant and toxin removal.

Middle Water Filtration Catch Basin

Middle Water Filtration Catch Basin

Upper Water Filtration Catch Basin



Gravel Base Middle Basin

small gravel bioremediation filtration

Each water basin allows the time needed for the toxins and contaminants the opportunity to mingle and the microbes and plant roots. 

This allows the microbes a homebase to feast and break down the contaminants and plant roots the time needed to phytoextract contaminants.

The middle basin with the gravel base is very similar to how a sand filtration system works in a fish tank. The gravel and rocks provide a safe home for the microbes to thrive.

The microbes are the workhorses with this bioremediation system.


Saturday, February 2, 2019

Lessoning Agriculture Field Water Runnoff Pollution

 Agriculture contaminants is one of the 3 pollution sources quoted in EWG's Tap Water Database: Pollution Sources and is one reason ElectroHemp has been sharing ways farmers can use buffer zones, filter strips with phytoremediation to lesson field pollution runoff scenarios.

Agriculture

Agricultural activities are one of the main sources of water pollution for U.S. rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands and groundwater. Each year, farm operators apply more than 12 million tons of nitrogen fertilizer and 8 million tons of phosphorous fertilizer to cropland, some of which runs off into water sources.


Manure is another important source of water contamination. It’s estimated that livestock produce up to 1 billion tons of manure each year, and runoff from farms and feedlots can be laden with sediments and disease-causing microorganisms. And many pesticides have no federally mandated limits for drinking water, which means utilities and their customers have no benchmark to know if the amount of a specific pesticide in water is safe.



Many water utilities in farm country are forced to treat water supplies to remove agriculture-related pollutants, often relying on expensive processes such as carbon treatment and ion exchange. Despite utilities' efforts, agricultural contaminants are detected in the drinking water served to millions of Americans each year.


Source: EWG's Tap Water Database: Pollution Sources




Sunday, December 30, 2018

Phytoremediation Raft Remove Toxic Pollutants Water

The following photos are examples of where ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources from Bridgetown and Westlake Landfill this would stop the pollution from entering the Public Water Supply, as pointed out by Alex Cohen.



The above 3 photos courtesy Environmental Activist and Humanitarian Alex Cohen- https://m.faceboAlex Cohen.
ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts Remediation Example for decontamination of water.
ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts


Uranium Water Biofilter Remediation

ElectroHemp blog post on Uranium Reducing Phytoremediation Raft Design
ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources

Previously ElectroHemp highlighted how Natural biofilters for toxic metals can be used for Pb (Lead) Removal. This same technique can be used for Uranium (U) removal. 
All that needs to be done is substitute the Raft and Plants that will extract Uranium and it's by products.
Example: A phytoremediation raft can be constructed with these biosorbing products: Tree Bark (Pinus, Acacia), Agro Wastes (Tea Leaves, Rice Hulls) Apple Wastes . With these type of hyperaccumulating plant species: Hemp, Kenaf, Sun Flowers, Mustard Grass, Rape, even some Grasses 
To ensure all the Toxic Contamination comes in contact with the Raft and Plant Roots growing on the Phytoremediation Rafts that phytoextract the toxins. ElectroHemps uses Electrokinetics into the Remediation removal process. Electrokinetics draws toxins where directed.
ElectroHemps combines Electrokinetics, Phytoremediation, and Biofilters into the Remediation removal process. Key point: Electrokinetics draws toxins where directed.

Natural biofilters for toxic metals

The following Science Paper highlights how ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Rafts can be used as Biofilters to clean pollution from water sources.
Phytoremediation Raft Infographic- Plants cycle water toxins when grown on Rafts
a wide variety of agricultural and forestry by products have been used as biosorbents of toxic metals in a bid to develop biofilters for specific applications Electronic Journal of Biotechnology
The added benefit of how ElectroHemp equips these rafts with Electrokinetics will actually increase the toxic contamination removal because of the forced migration of the toxins is directed towards the rafts and plants roots which growing on the Phytoremediation Rafts.
The added benefit of how ElectroHemp equips these rafts with Electrokinetics will actually increase both the toxic up take in the plants because the forced migration of the toxins is directed towards the rafts and plants roots growing on the Phytoremediation Rafts.
ElectroHemp Phytoremediation Raft designs can be designed to remove any number or combination of toxic pollutants found in water sources.

A floating phytoremediation raft constructed of: waste tea leaves, Pinus pinaster bark, Olea europea, Acacia nilotica bark. Which has these plant examples growing on it: KenafWater LettuceAlligator Weed create a combination of Natural Solutions in the detoxification of Lead (Pb) from water. Scotty, ElectroHemp 
Phytoremediation Science Paper link
  • i) Cotton - Hg; Groundnut skins - Cu; 
  • Tree Bark (Pinus, Acacia etc.) - variety of metals; 
  • Agrowaste - variery of metals; 
  • waste tea leaves - Pb, Cd, and Zn; 
  • Pinus radiata -U; 
  • Apple waste -Variety of metals; 
  • Cellulose - Variety of metals; Rice hulls - Variety of metals; 
  • Exhausted coffee grounds - Hg; 
  • Pinus pinaster bark - Zn, Cu, Pb. Saw mill dust (wood waste)- Cr; 
  • Freshwater green algae - variety of metals; 
  • Marine algae- Pb, Ni; 
  • ii) Sphagnum (moss peat) - Cr(VI); 
  • iii) Immobilized Aspergillus niger, A. oryzae - Cd, Cu, Pb, and Ni ; 
  • Olive mill waste Olea europea Cr, Ni, Pb, Cd, and Zn, Cu and Ni; 
  • Streptomyces rimosus (bacteria); 
  • Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast); 
  • Penicillium chrysogenum (fungi), Fuscus vesiculosus and Ascophyllum nodosum (marine algae) Zn, Cu andNi; Phanerochaete chrysosporium, P. versicolar - Pb, Ni, Cr, Cd, Cu; Pinus radiata - U;
  • Immobilized Pseudomonas putida 5-X and Aspergillus niger, Mucor rouxxi - Cu; 
  • Actionomycetes, Aspergillus niger, A.oryzae, Rhizopus arrhizus, R. nigricans- Cd; Rhizopus arrhizus - Cr(VI), Pb; Rhizopus nigricans, Phanarochaete chrysogenum -Pb; Aspergillus niger and Rhizopus arrhizus - Ni 

Acacia nilotica bark serves as an adsorbent of toxic metals. Bark (1 g) when added to 100 ml of aqueous solution containing 10 mg ml-1 metal solution exhibited different metal adsorption values for different metals. The order of metal adsorption being Cr > Ni > Cu > Cd> As > Pb. A similar trend of metal adsorption was observed when the bark is reused (1strecycle) Cr > Ni > Cu > Cd > Pb and also in the column-sorption. In order to verify the metal removal property of A. nilotica bark, toxicity bioassay with Salix viminalis stem cuttings in hydroponic system augmented with Cd, Cr and Pb together with A. nilotica bark powder was carried out. The results of toxicity bioassay confirmed the metal adsorption property of the bark powder. The functions of toxicity studies include leaf area, root length and number of new root primordia produced per stump. The leaf area, root length and number of new root primordia increased considerably in the presence of A. nilotica bark. The order of metal toxicity for leaf area and new root primordial is Cd > Cr > Pb. However, for root length the order of metal toxicity is Cr > Cd > Pb. The metal budgets of the leaf and root confirmed that the bark powder had adsorbed substantial amount of toxic metals and thus, alleviates the toxicity imposed by the various tested elements (Prasad et al. 2001).

Quercus ilex L. phytomass from stem, leaf and root as adsorbent of chromium, nickel, copper, cadmium and lead at ambient temperature was investigated. The metal uptake capacity of the root for different metals was found to be in the order of: Ni > Cd > Pb > Cu > Cr; stem Ni > Pb> Cu > Cd > Cr and leaf Ni > Cd > Cu > Pb > Cr. The highest amount adsorbed was Ni (root > leaf > stem). Data from this laboratory demonstrated that Ni is mostly sequestered in the roots where concentrations can be as high as 7.30 nmol/g dry weight, when one year old seedlings were treated with Ni (2000 mg/l) in pot culture experiments, compared to 0.13 nmol/g dry weight, in the control. This proves that the root biomass of Q. ilex has the capacity for complexing Ni. Chromium exhibited the least adsorption values for all the three types of phytomass compared to other metals. The trend of adsorption of the phytomass was similar for nickel and cadmium i.e. root > leaf > stem. Desorption with 10 mM Na2 EDTA was effective (55-90%). Hence, there exists the possibility of recycling the phytomass. The biosorption results of recycled phytomass suggests, that the selected adsorbents are reusable (Prasad and Freitas, 2000).

Wednesday, June 20, 2018

ElectroHemp Hydroponic Remediation Examples

Water Pollution Clean Up Contamination Removal - Pilot Study Option 11A and 12A .

Water pump circulates contaminated water through the plant roots which phytoextract the toxins.

Testing Highlights

Each Stage allows for determining the reduction in water contamination levels (11A).

  • Reduction per plant, stage, and total.
  • Financial Costs of phytoremediation
  • Length of Time Required for Total, Partial phytoextraction of contamination.
  • Before, During, After Plant phyto-location tests: Roots, Stalk, Leaves, Seeds


It's not Rocket Science it's Phyto Science 


The Magic Happens in the Roots of the Plants as they absorb the pollution.


Infographic by Scotty scottscontracting@gmail.com
Water Pollution Clean Up Contamination Removal - Pilot Study Option 11A. 4 Stage Water cleanup testing station. Hydroponic toxic removal.
Water Pollution Clean Up Contamination Removal - Pilot Study Option 11A. 4 Stage Water cleanup testing station. Hydroponic toxic removal.

Water Pollution Clean Up Contamination Removal - Pilot Study Option 12A.   Testing Options Individual Plant Pots
Water Pollution Clean Up Contamination Removal Pilot Study Option 12A. 
Testing Option- Individual Plant Pots




Tuesday, August 15, 2017

8/15/17 Letter MO DNR, Politicians, Reporters, et al

MO DNR Employees, Politiicians, Reporters, et al
ublicnoticenpdes@dnr.mo.govcontact@dnr.mo.gov,
environmental.education@dnr.mo.gov,
mowaters@dnr.mo.gov,
envirolab@dnr.mo.gov,
hazwaste@dnr.mo.gov,
soils@dnr.mo.gov,
cleanwater@dnr.mo.gov,
drinkingwater@dnr.mo.gov,
mining@dnr.mo.gov
christopher.nagel@dnr.mo.gov
communications@dnr.mo.gov
Senator Claire McCaskill

Michele Kratky 
Mariah Chappel Nadalcc: Tony Messenger StL Post Dispatch


RE: 2 part email- Storm Water Permit MO-0122771
Part 1: Missouri Resident, St. Louis Voter. Part 2: Problem and Economical Solution Examples

This is my 3rd contact with the MO DNR. I'd like to remind everyone that the Team and I are willing to offer any assistance needed to assist in containing and contolling the polloution from the landfill. I am not going to give up helping my neighbors as I will partly be helping myself in an act of self preservation to avoid becoming a Cancer Cluster Statistic. Scotty

Part 1: As a MIssouri Voter:
I am continually shocked at the continued lack of remedial action at the Westlake Landfill. MO DNR own documents prove the contamination is spreading outside the landfill. MO DNR cannot continue to deny the facts.  Letting the pollution reach the city sewers and the Missouri River, as it is currently happening in addition to allowing the leechage pumping system to drain into the city sewers as the numerous photos show and were tracked by Residents of the community, is a total disregard for the Health of the residents in the Region.

Part 2: Problem
"Stormwater from just outside the fence line of the West Lake Landfill complex, the dumping ground for Manhattan Project-era radioactive waste, contains a variety of radioactive isotopes, according to test results released late last month by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.
The sampling of stormwater overflow, conducted on April 30 as heavy rains pounded the region, found levels of alpha particle activity that exceed the threshold allowed for drinking water. Uranium, radium and gross beta readings all registered within acceptable limits for drinking water, which the department used as a comparative baseline because of its stringent standards. StLouis Post Dispatch "
https://dnr.mo.gov/bridgeton/docs/20170430StormWaterResults.pdf
**Important** Radioactive Alpha particles found by the State of MO DNR in Storm Water from this past...

Solution Examples:
"Plants as Water Protectors" 

#PlantsAsWaterProtectors #PhytoremediationRafts

Toxins can be cycled from the water inexpensively with plants in a process called Phytoremediation.

2: Riparian Buffer Zone Examples in Real Life St.Louis Locations. 

Location 1:


Location 2: IKEA 

The above images were used as examples in a remediaiton information packet called: Plants as Water Protectors information series.

Article 5- Phytromediation Rafts with Electrokinetics
Article 4- Plants as Water Protectors
Article 3- Citizen Science Phytoremediation Research StLouis
Article 2- St Louis IKEA Phyto Buffer Zone pt2
Article 1- IKEAs lesser known environmental project

Wednesday, August 9, 2017

5 Blog Articles Plants as Water Protectors Series

ElectroHemp BioRad Hazmat Remediation weblinks to the 5 blog articles covering the subject of Plants as Water Protectors.  Using Plants to remove heavy metals and toxic contaminants from Water and Soil.
ElectroHemp Natural and Organic BioRad 5 Stage Treatment Train speeds up the Toxic Removal Process
ElectroHemp Natural and Organic BioRad 5 Stage Treatment Train speeds up the Toxic Removal Process

The ElectroHemp BioRad Remediation System and Process works faster than Phytoremediation alone by incorporating Electrokinetics into the system. 

Electrokinetics aka Electro-Horticulture directs the heavy metal toxins to a central point where plants phytoextract the toxins.
Electrokinetics directs the heavy metal toxins to a central point where plants phytoextract the toxins. 


Search This Blog

ElectroHemp Introduction

ElectroHemp Hazardous Waste Remediation Intro

ElectroHemp BioRad Hazardous Waste Cleanup Introduction ElectroHemp - BioRad CleanUp 5 Stage Phytoremediation Treatment Train - Remove...