5.7 San Jose's Sewage Treatment Facility

The San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility works 24/7 cleaning all of Silicon Valley’s wastewater. The Facility serves 1.4 million residents, over 17,000 business in 8 cities, and four sanitation districts. The facility treats an average of 110 million gallons of wastewater per day and uses a treatment process that stimulates the way nature cleans water. When I was completing this research, I also found that San Jose-Santa Clara Regional Wastewater facility is the largest advanced wastewater treatment facility in the western US. The site also states its plans for the future which include the integration of cutting edge treatment technologies into its processes and the rebuilding of the infrastructure. 

5.5 Campaign for Tap Water

For my campaign to encourage people to drink tap water over bottled water, I would use the slogan “Refills, not Landfills”. To start this campaign, I would work with large corporations who have cafes on campus. Majority of these large corporations have water fountains all over campus and large soda fountains in the café. To promote refills, we can use infographics (like the one attached) informing employees of what plastic bottles do the environment. We can place these infographics around campus in breakrooms or even over the water fountains. We can also work with the café managers and make it so if an employee gets a soda from the soda fountain, it would be significantly cheaper than the bottle of Diet Coke from the fridge. 

5.4 My Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) and water quality

San Jose’s water (particularly North San Jose) gets its treated water from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) which is then delivered to customers in North San Jose. Majority of the water comes from the Hetch Hetchy Watershed, which is water from the snowmelt that flows down the Tuolumne River from the mountains in Yosemite. 

After reviewing the Annual Water Quality Report, I was happy to see that majority of the chemicals tested were within the range of the public health goal. A result that was higher than the rest was the Chromium-6. If anyone remembers the Erin Brockovich story, you will remember that Chromium-6 is a cancer-causing agent that can naturally occur in the environment, but also is polluted in the environment from industrial projects. I know the EPA has set strict standards for this element, but I think it’s crazy to see it still has traces in our waters. 

I typically am always drinking filtered water. At home I have a filter on my fridge and at work I purposely go to the break room water fountain. (Side note: I also recently found out that the break room water fountain is filtered more than the water fountains in my gym, so I tell everyone to go the break room to get water now). I know the tap water is okay in San Jose, but I would rather be more safe than sorry. I also hardly never drink from bottled water. I always make an effort to bring my hydroflask water bottle with me (I hate paying for water).

5.2 Safe Drinking Water

Earth has about 366 quintillion gallons of water on it, but sadly only 0.007% of this precious resource is drinkable. With more than 7 billion people all needing to drink water, it is a huge public health importance to enact, uphold, and update the Clean Water Act. In 1972, the Clean Water Act was passed by Congress which dramatically bettered numerous bodies of water in the United States. Before the act was passed, many individuals and companies were carelessly polluting our lakes, riverways, and oceans. This made them not only toxic for us humans but all aquatic wildlife. The Act divides pollution into three areas for purposes of regulation and urges individuals and companies to abide by the regulations. The example, given in the video on the Clean Water Act, about the Chicago River perfectly represents how this Act was a success and can still a success if it updated for this era. 

**Side note: Having gone to school in Indiana and have frequently visited Chicago, you still don't go in the Chicago River. Much of the public is very wary of its cleanliness. It is kind of like the Bay in the way.**

4.5 Think about it/Group Exercise

From the videos on air pollution and the three articles, it is clear that children are the most subjective to environmental exposures. Indoor air pollution is the most common exposure in children and is why 2 in 5 school aged children in California have asthma. In order to combat this exposure, which is preventable, a chemical/fragrance policy in schools would be a manageable plan. It would push school staff to better regulate what kind of cleaning products are being used and fragrances worn by either the staff or the students. A policy could include items such as: decreasing the amount of chemicals used to clean by janitors, kindly asking the teachers and staff not to wear any overpowering scent/perfume while on the school’s campus, or if there is a locker room to ask the students to not bring certain body sprays. This is a potentially touchy subject, as you do not want to regulate how a person choice to live, but by at least stopping a few things could dramatically decrease the amount of air pollutants surrounding a school. 

Side Note: When I was in college living in my sorority house, we actually had a girl who had bad allergic reactions to Febreze. One day in our chapter meetings, she described her situation and kindly asked the entire chapter to please use any other air freshener besides Febreze. Nobody questioned it or complained, as she was open and honest with her situation. Since that night, nobody used Febreze. 

4.6 Radon

I would devise a campaign that educates the public through a short video that can be advertised on social media outlets. It is estimated that 3.196 billion people are using social media. By creating a 1-minute video that explains what radon is, the dangers of radon, where it comes from, and how to test for it; we can reach millions of people and educate them on the risks. We can also create the video to be in various different languages, making it accessible for everyone. Stakeholders for this campaign would include the EPA, Dr. Akerley (he created the 3-minute video on Radon), Lung Cancer Organizations, or local/regional environmental health workers. 

4.2 National Library ToxNet

The lectures on toxic exposures were educational and very interesting. A lecture I found particularly interesting was the fracking and health. Having gone to undergraduate in Indiana, I heard a little about fracking but never thought too much about it. Learning how these chemicals can cause serious health problems was eye-opening and very saddening. I also had no idea these operations where happening right here in CA, only a few hours south in Monterey. 

Using the National Library’s ToxNet Resources website, we were prompted to look up a chemical and review the health effects associated with the exposure to it. I looked up Urea Formaldehyde, which is used in building homes. This toxic chemical can be found in building items such as pressed wood, foam insulation, glues, and particle board.  Exposure to this chemical can result in respiratory irritation (upper and lower), eye irritations, increased cancer risk, and burning sensations in the eyes and throat. Being aware of these kind of health effects is a good idea, as much of these symptoms will not appear if the formaldehyde exposure is below 1.0 ppm. 

3.5 Transportation

To be completely honest, I have never really relied on public transportation. Growing up in the suburbs of the tri-valley (Danville) you drove everywhere, even if you wanted to take Bart you would have to drive to the Bart station (which was a 10-minute drive either north or south). Even when I was doing my undergraduate at Purdue University in Indiana, I would walk everywhere. Yes, the buses were reliable there, but they were always overcrowded and would actually end up taking longer than it would to walk. I also found walking around campus a great way to get some exercise in. Still to this day, I typically drive everywhere I need to go. I know public transportation has many more benefits than me driving my car but when it comes down to it, it would take me 30+ minutes to get to work if I took public transportation, where if I drive it takes me 12 minutes maximum. Since moving to San Jose, my boyfriend and I do try to come into work together at least two times a week (we work at the same company) but it does get hard at times with changing schedules. 

I wish California, in reality the entire United States, had better public transportation. It would dramatically increase our air quality by reducing pollution, there would a reduction in car fatalities and injuries, and make our population overall healthier. Sitting in a car for an hour doing nothing takes a serious toll on a person’s health, whereas public transportation has proven benefits of decreasing the overall obesity rates due to active commuting. 

3.4 Air Pollution in SJ

Last month I moved into a new apartment in San Jose. For this blog entry, I decided to observe the county I just moved into, Santa Clara Country. 

Santa Clara Country was ranked among the dirtiest/worst 10% of all counties in the U.S. for toxic chemicals released by Factories, Power Plants, and other Industrial Companies in 2002. The top two polluters are Owens Corning Corporation (180,227 pounds) and Hanson Permanente Cement (36,138). The top chemicals released into the country are Ammonia (130,175 pounds), Formaldehyde (54,992 pounds), and Hydrochloric Acid (36,542). 

Only 1% of houses in Santa Clara country have a high of lead hazards 

In 2004, Santa Clara County was ranked of the 10% dirtiest/worst counties in the US to have designated Superfund sites. Of the top Superfund sites were Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Inc. and CTS Printex Incorporated. AMD Inc. manufactures electronic equipment at a plant in Sunnyvale and has monitoring wells that are contaminated with like Chloroform, 1,1-Dichloroethylene, and Tetrachloroethylene. CTS Printex Inc. manufactures printed circuit boards in Mountain View and is known for high levels of copper and lead usage. 

In 2003, Santa Clara County was ranked among the dirtiest/worst 10% of all counties in the U.S. for smog and soot as well as posing a cancer risk for hazardous air pollutants. The facility that let out the most emissions at 101 tons was Kaiser Cement Corp.. 

The water quality is just above the national average. The percentage of surface waters with impaired or threatened uses was at a 70%, while the number of impaired waterbodies was 60%. 

Santa Clara County (95112) is rated poorly regarding environmental justice with the low-income communities and communities of color suffering greater impacts from environmental degradation. 

Overall, learning these details about Santa Clara County was not all that surprising. San Jose is very much a town where you are in a nice neighborhood one minute and then a not very nice neighborhood the next minute. It is also a huge technology hub for many  companies, so I am sure hundreds of toxic chemicals are being pumped into our environment without our knowledge everyday. I think just being aware of these different kinds of exposure is the most important part as we as humans can better protect outselves. 

3.3 Environmental Justice

For decades, issues have come arise that people of color have decreased health outcomes because systems back in the day were not in place to protect them. The impact of environment on human health was overstated for years which increased poor air quality, disproportionate exposures to hazards, and unhealthy housing conditions. All which are highly correlated with chronic conditions like asthma, cardiovascular disease, obesity, and cancer. It was not until the 1980’s when the U.S. General Accounting Office did a study which found that 3 out of 4 hazard waste landfills in the Southern region of the US were located in predominately African American communities. From then, countless executive orders and laws have been passed in order to reverse some of the damage that has been done, but sadly it is not enough. 

In the reading, 8 Horrifying Examples of Corporations Mistreating Black Communities with Environmental Racism, an excerpt that really hit home was the Chevron Richmond Refinery, by Standard Oil. With how expensive California is to live in, it is no wonder why these underprivileged communities, primarily African Americans, either have to or choose to live in Richmond. In the article, it stated that people living in Richmond are at a higher risk of dying from heart disease or strokes and are more likely to have asthma. 

I always pass the Valero Benicia Refinery when driving up to my family’s lake house. Every time I pass it I can’t help but think that what they are pumping into our air and water is not environmentally friendly and can cause serious health concerns. It really scares me to think that these kinds of refineries can have such a terrible impact onto our environment and health. Obviously being aware of what kind of toxins someone is being exposed to in these communities is important but when is enough enough? 

3.2 Vulnerable Populations

After reading the readings and watching the videos, it was clear that there is still so much work that needs to be done to help protect the vulnerable populations from toxic chemical exposures. Children are at the forefront of this protection, as they are more susceptible to many environmental pollutants than adults and majority of their exposures can be prevented. Asthma is 30% preventable for children and is associated with mold, tobacco smoke, chemical cleaners, and air pollutants. Cancer is 15% preventable for children and is associated with radiation exposures, pesticides, solvents, and in-utero chemical exposures. Neurobehavioral disorders are 10% preventable for children and is associated with lead, PCBs, PBDEs, pesticides, and air pollutants. Sadly, many healthcare professionals only fix the problem they see instead of digging into why these children have such issues. In the reading, Costs of Environmental Health Conditions in California Children, it was stated that only 3% of the US’s $2.5 trillion dollars in health goes toward public health initiatives and disease prevention. The other 97% goes directly towards healthcare costs and medical service expenses.

The video that really caught my eye was the Tedtalk by Rishi Manchanda, that represents that some doctors see this backwards way of medicine and is trying to get in control of it. He talks about his work as a clinician and how he examines health where it begins. After examining the client’s symptoms, he asks basic questions to get an idea of the kind of exposures could be causing their symptoms. He asks his client about where they work, where they live, and where they spend majority of their lives. They call themselves the “upstream-ists”, where they implement a process that changes the way of medicine. They not only try to fix the problem at hand (the client’s symptoms), but they try to fix it from never happening again by mobilizing outside resources (like community advocates or even lawyers).  

Until our government and chemical companies come to terms that toxic chemical exposures are dangerous even at very low levels (which might never happen). I think by pushing doctors and other healthcare professionals to continue on the path of finding out why such disease are happening, we can dramatically decrease the effects of preventable diseases, especially among children. The more aware everyone is of the risks toxic chemicals can have, the better off our community will be in the long run. 

3.1 Biomonitoring

After watching the video segment “Body Burdens” by Anderson Cooper, if I myself did a body burden exam and got those results back, I would be extremely disappointed and scared. The two chemicals I would be most concerned about would be DDT and PCBs. Both of these chemicals have been banned in the United States since the 1970’s and are highly correlated with causing cancer in humans. I would be curious to find out how I was exposed to such a toxic chemically, especially because I was born in 1992 (way after the ban of these chemicals). Other chemicals I would not be so surprised about being in my blood would be Phthalates, Lead, or Dioxins. Sadly, these chemicals are still present in our environment and it on us humans to be aware of these toxins and their health effects. I wish it was the other way around and the government be the one to act but until that happens, I think informing people that these toxic chemicals are still present and can cause serious health effects is extremely important. 

2.4 Ken Cook and Advocacy Organizations on Toxics in Personal Care Products

The presentation and video by Ken Cook, the president of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), was extremely eye-opening and shocking. Pediatricians and doctors previously thought that fetuses were safe from toxic pollutants because the placenta would flush them out. The experiment completed by Ken Cook and the EWG, “10 Americans”, researched this and found staggering evidence that proved that fact to be completely false. They found 287 toxic chemicals in 10 fetuses, representing to the public that the first time in a person’s life that they are exposed toxic chemicals is in the womb.  With such a vulnerable population, it is our duty to be aware of these kinds of exposures and attempt to prevent any negative exposures (which might be impossible unless chemical companies change their views as well).  I am happy to see that there was an act created in response to all this information called the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act in 2008, but when I looked it up today it seems that it had died in Congress. I feel like nowadays (10 years later) people are more aware of the toxic chemicals in our environment and if an act like this was created again if it would pass. I did see that the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 was modernized under President Obama in 2016, which is good to hear, but I don’t know how much of an impact that would have on the more vulnerable populations, like the fetuses. 

2.3 Household Products

Not only do our personal care products pose a health risk but the products we use daily to clean our homes also pose significant risks. Two products I reviewed were ther multi-surface cleaner I use and the glass cleaner I use. For everyday spills and wiping down of my counters, I use Mrs. Meyer’s Clean Day Multi-Surface Everyday Cleaner, Lavender. This product does not meet the classification as being hazardous to our health by OSHA. The product also received a zero as hazardous to our health. I excepted these results as I had actually read an article about the benefits of this brand before trying it for myself. 

            I also reviewed the glass cleaner I use to wipe down the mirrors and windows of my home. I use the trusty Original Windex Glass Cleaner. I feel like this product is a staple in majority of houses, which is one of the reasons I reviewed it. Windex does not contain hazardous chemicals at or above OSHA standards (health rating=1). It did receive a higher rating of a 2 (moderate) of flammability which I did expect. I am glad to find out that this trusty staple in homes does not have a high hazardous rating. 

I don’t think I will be changing my consumer behavior after reviewing these two products, but I might check some of my other products when I get a chance to make sure they do not pose any significant health risks. I think everyone should know about the risks surrounding every day cleaning products. Many of the labels can be misleading making people assume they are being environmentally friendly when in fact it is hurting their overall health and our environment. 

2.2 Personal Care Products

I looked up the body wash I use on a daily basis and my shampoo which I use every other day. I expected the results of my body wash (Aveeno Daily Moisturizing) as being a 4 on the hazardous scale (moderate). I expected it because Aveeno is not typically advertised as being free-this or free-that, but I am glad it was not scored higher. Even though this product had a score of 4, when reviewing the ingredient list, it did have formaldehyde (quaternium-15) in it. This fact was concerning as formaldehyde is a toxin that causes cancer. I may be trying to find a new body wash when that times comes.

I was extremely surprised of the results from the shampoo I use (Tigi Bed Head Self-Absorbed Mega Nutrient Shampoo). It received a rating of 7 (high) on the hazardous scale. This scares me because I thought was using a higher end shampoo, but it really goes to show that no matter the price difference, it depends on the ingredients used in the product. I will definitely be using this website to find another shampoo and conditioner as I am almost out of this current product. 

            In both items, I was surprised to see that fragrance had the highest level of toxicity. I would have never guessed that as I try to buy items that are not too overpowering in smell. It is concerning to think about the items that are overpouring and makes me curious to see what kind of ratings they would have. I think it is extremely important that everyone is aware about these kinds of risks because they are not something people talk about it. It also good for people to know the various names of different toxins as manufacturers try to hide/bury them in the ingredient list making them look good when in reality they aren’t.