The Nature of the Problem – Water Pollution (1967)

DR. ALBERT E. BERRY,
PRESIDENT,
THE CONSERVATION COUNCIL OF ONTARIO.

Pollution of man’s environment is not new. It has existed, to some extent, since man first inhabited this land. It was not until the settlements along the nation’s waterways grew into urban communities that this problem reached sufficient proportions to arouse public concern. For over half a century there has been an ebb and flow of interest in this situation. Now, at long last, there is a realization, greater than ever before, of the basic role and importance of our water resources.

Have we now reached the point where sustained action to protect our resources can be assured? Are we prepared to meet the challenge of new pollutants, of new demands on our resources, and a willingness to pay the price for a clean, healthy environment? We have come, it would seem, to a fork in the road of progress. Which path do we take ? People confidently look through science to a future in which they can hope to become masters of their own destiny. Man’s environment, with all the factors which play upon his welfare looms large in that destiny. But science alone cannot accomplish our hoped for objective, even though science is gaining momentum day by day, and its impact on all of us is more immediate than it has ever been. We shall have a better chance to survive and create that dream world if, in the years to come, we can produce more and better trained scientists, supplied with the best equipment, more engineers ready to nourish their art at the very frontiers of science; and if all this is combined intelligently with an aggressive public, fully informed and demanding in action. We cannot leave our future to the scientist alone. All must be a part.

What happens in the future depends on us. It has been well said by that eminent philosopher, Bertrand Russell, “that as a result of science the world of the future will be either very much better or much worse. You who are young will soon find out. ” Here then is a challenge for each to play his part and make a contribution to the world of tomorrow. Man’s very survival depends on the wise use of his resources. It has been observed by one authority that the disaster which Americans must continually patrol against is the reckless and speedy consumption of our natural resources by our waste and profligacy. We could use up most of these resources and leave future generations comparatively destitute.

The prevention of such a catastrophe has come to be known as “conservation”. Let it not be said that the individual is unable to play a part in this.

Man’s contact with his environment is many-sided. Water, air, and soil are the most common ones, and these obviously must play an important role in his welfare and his safety. Life is close coordination with the environment. Even today’s definition of environmental health says “anything which may have an adverse effect of public health over what was formerly involved, in great measure, with the control of infectious diseases. It is a positive attitude on program for man’s complete well-being.

It is clear that people are changed by technological changes. Technology is now giving us options, and will increasingly do so, to use our leisure time. Shall we use this freedom to choose in a profitable way to improve our status or will we waste it? We need to turn over our man-made environment into a teaching device. We can no longer depend on the relatively short exposure in the classroom. It will bear repeating that the wise use and management of natural resources can only be attained through an understanding of the basic processes related to water, soil, and the atmosphere. Man has now attained the ability to alter drastically his environment and that of other organisms. Many of his activities already have impaired seriously his own environment and that of other living things. Water pollution and other changes, made in the interest of development and progress, ranks high in these detrimental effects.

Lessons from Past Expereince

Can we derive some advantages from the experiences of the past? It would be a foolish man who would ignore these, even in this day of rapid change. Let us look at some of these events which have given rise to public reaction and have influenced behaviour.

In the early part of this century water pollution was considered chiefly in relation to typhoid fever outbreaks. The high prevalence and mortality from this disease aroused grave concern. But that was still regarded as local rather than provincial or national. In fact in 1909 when the Boundary Waters Treaty was under review between Canada and the United States it was recorded in the U. S. Senate that there was little possibility of pollution of boundary waters becoming a serious problem. The public could not well comprehend the significance of water pollution on such a large scale.

Yet it was only four years later that the Governments of Canada and the United States requested the International Joint Commission, created under the Treaty, to determine if the boundary waters were polluted so as to be injurious to public health and unfit for domestic use. This investigation revealed high bacteriological pollution. Recommendations for the correction of these conditions, resulting primarily from the discharge of domestic sewage, were neither ignored nor acted upon.

As water purification was extended, especially through the application of chlorination, typhoid fever outbreaks dwindled. The significance of pollution in drinking waters lost its public support, war and economic conditions added further argument for delay. The era of public indifference to water pollution had set in. Fear of disease was no longer the goad for attacking pollution. Public expenditures were demanded in other fields, more popular than waste treatment works.

The industrial developments which mushroomed after World War II brought with them the new problem of complex industrial wastes and congested urban dwelling. These new conditions, involving tastes in drinking water, physical degradation of the waters, and the fresh demand for abundant clean water for industry, growing municipalities and many other uses, gave a new focus to the value of water resources. In the last decade the appreciation of the value of these resources has grown tremendously. Public health and bacteriological parameters are no longer the complete yardsticks for quality. Water suitable for any and all uses must be the guiding principle. Many disciplines are now required in the management of water resources for these wider concepts of use.

The foregoing briefly summarizes the changing attitudes over the years towards water pollution. It must not be overlooked that public interest in the past has seldom manifested itself effectively until conditions became critical. The current means of communication and public information should enable a repetition of this procedure to be avoided. Do these lessons of the past teach us to act now as we stand at the fork in the road to progress ?

The Water Pollution Problem

But this paper is presumed to deal with the water pollution problems of today: What are these problems and how are they to be overcome? What is our position at present ? Are we losing or winning against water pollution ? What can we anticipate for the future ?

What is Water Pollution?

At the outset, there needs to be a clear understanding of what constitutes water pollution. Strange as it may seem this is not easy to define. One need only to look at the definitions given in various legislative enactments to see the wide divergence of thinking. Yet, we must know the rules of the game before we can be expected to play our part. All too often, the polluter or probably more correctly termed the user of the stream, claims he is not to blame. Others may regard pollution as something which to most people either doesn’t exist or is of minor significance. It is for the technically trained and competent persons to agree on standards of water quality and to have these incorporated into legislation. In Ontario the definition is clear that pollution is anything which may impair or have an adverse effect on the quality of the water. It is not restricted to effects on public health. Gravel washing, the discharge of hot water, or the addition of color might come in this category. To make this definition more workable numerical figures are incorporated into standards or objectives.

In this province, the Ontario Water Resources Commission Act, first passed in 1956 and amended yearly since, is the legislation most directly applicable. It is broad in scope and must be recognized as modern as any to be found anywhere in the world. It deals with the overall management of water resources, a part of which is pollution control. Accordingly we can approach these existing problems on the basis that the legislation is intrinsically sound and capable of supplying the necessary background for action.

Stream Uses

There are oft-expressed misconceptions on the uses of a stream or other watercourse. It is clear that it must serve our domestic, industrial, agricultural, recreational, and other needs. But another use, and a perfectly legitimate one, is to carry away wastes. In the minds of some there seems to be an idea that no wastes should be allowed to enter a stream. This is totally unrealistic and impractical of attainment. Water which is devoid of dissolved materials is intolerable in nature because pure water will not support aquatic life. The obvious solution is to ensure that these wastes, as they reach the stream at any point, will not interfere with the reasonable use of that water by others. This is where standards of quality play an important role. These must be capable of ready interpretation and must be fair for all users.

Our modern concept of pollution control requires that no stream user has the right to cause injury to others, whether the others be municipalities, industries, agriculture, recreationists, or aquatic life and wildlife. This altruistic viewpoint has two requirements:

1. The right of the riparian owner to suitable quality in the water as it reaches him.
2. The obligation, on the part of anyone responsible for wastes, to treat or control these so they will not injure a downstream user.

This two-sided concept of water pollution must apply to all. But the actual requirements in this program will vary considerably as influenced by volume of diluting water, uses made of it, and the nature of the wastes. The criterion is thus to ensure that any polluting substance will be below a specified level. This will be determined by laboratory tests.

Every watercourse has a certain capacity to receive wastes within the quality limits. Fortunately streams have marked recuperative ability to breakdown most wastes and render them harmless, but some of the modern complex pollutants are slow to degrade. Insecticides and pesticides are examples. So was the old form of detergent. Regardless of the substance and the volume of flow of the stream the amount must be kept within prescribed limits.

Here then is the objective we must set for ourselves in the control of water pollution. The watercourses are for all uses by all persons, but no one has the right to interfere with the use of those waters by others. This has many difficulties on a small stream serving as an outlet for several communities.

What Has Been Accomplished?

There is obviously a good deal of public confusion about what has been and is being accomplished today in water pollution. This is a world-wide problem, and it is being attacked on many fronts. Since this conference is for Ontario alone, it is well to consider what has been accomplished here. The problem or difficulty is constantly compounded by the increase in population, concentration in urban centres, and the growth of industry. All these tend to add more wastes, with the discharges at a limited number of points instead of being diffused. Accomplishment must be measured by the construction of waste treatment facilities and by the assessment of water quality. There is ample evidence from the records that in recent years, for ten or more years, a great deal has been done in this province.

Where Do We Stand Today

In spite of these accomplishments, and all the planning that goes with them, we are most concerned about our present position. Have we reached the desired objective, or what more is to be done? What also can be done to meet the problems which are certain to arise in the future from industry and communities?

Recently the comment was expressed by a foremost authority that in his opinion the situation in respect to water pollution was getting worse. He was speaking of world conditions. This does not appear to be so in Ontario. At the same time it is necessary to emphasize that problems, and difficult ones, still exist here. In fact, to be realistic we must expect that pollution problems will always be with us. This does not preclude the maintenance of that reasonable standard of water quality as we may see fit to set up.

Why are We In This Position?

If polluting man’s environment has worsened over many years why has it been allowed to do so ? This is a question which many find difficult to understand. We should recognize that all the activities of man produce wastes of some kind. Are human beings less disposed than animals to protect their environment against these wastes ? It would seem to be the case. Why have so many municipalities, even large cities, turned away from building sewage purification plants? Why is the largest city in Canada still discharging all its sewage untreated into the river? This negligence has persisted in spite of strong warnings, urgings, and endeavors of senior levels of governments.

There seems one predominant reason — lack of interest on the part of the public. It is true that the war and economic conditions were also convenient factors, but other measures, involving large expenditures, were undertaken. Sewage had no appeal so long as it moved elsewhere from the front door.

What Are The Problems?

If we have been slow to meet our obligations in protecting our environment, and if we still have much to do, what are the present day problems that hold us back? It is well that these be examined critically. If we are now to succeed, we must know those factors that act as a brake on our efforts. There are still many of these.

1. Public Attitude

It has been seen how public attitude influences our actions and especially our expenditure of public funds. At present, the interest of the public is most encouraging, but will this continue until these measures are well advanced? There will need to be strong leadership to keep the movement in the right direction.

2. Public Information

is a very necessary part of the program of action. Our present media of communication make it possible to convey information very quickly. The great danger in this is that the wrong information may be given, and the resulting action will be disappointing. There is yet no consistent means being used to ensure that adequate and reliable information reaches the public, and especially to those who must make decisions. Conferences of this kind will be helpful, but if these efforts are to bear fruit there will be need for concerted and continuous action on the parts of governments and voluntary agencies. This is one of the problems of today, and we need to find an early answer and a better one.

3. Urbanization and Industrialization

are two factors that go hand in hand to create a major problem. Yet we cannot expect this to be otherwise. Industrial production is so much an essential part of our standard of living that we must look for measures that will correct the deficiencies. In the case of water pollution it should be no more difficult, and in many instances less difficult, to treat these wastes by acting jointly rather than separately.

4. Industrial Wastes and Municipal Co-operation

Many of the present unsolved problems relate to the treatment of industrial wastes. Some of these are difficult in that they do not respond to the conventional methods of sewage treatment. Where these wastes can be mixed with municipal wastewaters their separate effects are often greatly reduced. Furthermore most industries are not specialists and do not desire to be, in the treatment of wastes.

There seems good reason today for municipal bodies to assume greater responsibilities for the treatment of wastes from industries within their borders. This should be considered as a municipal duty. The cost factor need not be a deterrent if arrangements are made to have these wastes treated at cost. Since industry pays large amounts in municipal taxes they have reason to expect a service of this kind. Looking at it from the standpoint of efficiency in results there is much to commend this practice of joint effort in waste treatment.

5. Cost of Treatment

The cost of waste treatment can never be given second rating, although in comparison with many other public activities it is not in an unfavorable position. One of the current problems with industrial wastes is undoubtedly the cost. This is especially true where the wastes are strong or do not react readily to treatment. Again, if the operations are seasonal, the capital costs to be spread over a few months’ activities rather than all year will be high. Combined with this is so often the need for a high degree of treatment because of the low flow seasonally in the receiving stream. Many of the watercourses of southern Ontario are so low in flow when most needed that they can carry only a small pollutional load. Must these conditions restrict the location of industries to large centres unless the smaller places are prepared to assume greater responsibilities in the treatment of the wastes? This appears to be the trend.

6. New Pollutants

We must expect, as we have in the past, that there will continue to be new pollutants among the wastes from modern living. Industry is much sought after, but if this is desired there must be a recognition of the wastes resulting from these operations and the feasibility of treating them successfully. Here is a problem which will require aggressive and cooperative action. Research will also be necessary.

7. Regional Solutions

While a good deal has already been done in considering waste treatment facilities for regions rather than by municipal boundaries this is still an acute problem. If municipalities cannot combine voluntarily for this program there is the very excellent arrangement for having the O. W. R. C. provide the service on a rental basis. The questionable luxury of having these plants built in proximity to one another to serve individual municipalities cannot be justified on a cost basis or efficiency in results.

8. Research Needs

Much has been said about the need for research in this field and of the inadequacy of the present programs. There are many facets of this problem which call for investigation. Here, surely is a field for the federal government. The results will benefit all Canada. Coordination of research efforts is also an urgent matter if we are to conserve our efforts and costs. These research studies must not only be directed to the development of new and more effective waste treatment processes but also to more economical measures. There is a real need in this today.

9. Agricultural Wastes

The problems of municipal and industrial wastes have been stressed herein, but what about agriculture? Two factors come to the fore at once. One must be the objection which the agriculturist finds to pollution of the stream from another source. This can have a damaging effect on his operations. The second problem is the waste from the farm itself. Agriculture is approaching more and more to industrial operations. The runoff from the land of wastes of high organic content, and the escape of chemical products for pesticides and herbicides open up a new challenge. There is need for a more active program of assistance to the farmer in the solution of this problem.

10. Higher Degrees of Treatment

Another current problem is aligned with the need for higher degrees of waste treatment, as well as the removal of certain other constituents. This may be illustrated by a small community with medium treatment and discharge of the effluent to a small stream. As the population grows or industry comes , the degree of treatment must be stepped up. The cost, for both capital and operation will be greater. The problem is further emphasized by the need to remove nutrients from the municipal wastes. The much talked about condition in Lake Erie calls for the reduction of nutrients, especially phosphates and nitrates. These are inadequately removed by conventional treatment works. Here is a new problem which may involve all wastes including municipal, agriculture and industry.

11. Solid Wastes

All too frequently the relationship between liquid and solid wastes has been overlooked. Garbage and all kinds of solid refuse are increasing at a rapid rate. Where can these be placed? Land for sanitary landfill is fast being used up. Care must be exercised in the selection of the site to ensure that the leachings therefrom will not pollute a watercourse or the ground waters. This is equal to or more important than any nuisance which may result at the site of the operations. There is an unwillingness on the part of municipalities to accept wastes from other municipalities.

12. Administration

The previously listed problems have been mostly concerned with the technical and physical difficulties to be overcome. What about the administration of these programs? Ontario is fortunate in having good basic legislation on water resource management yet complications do arise. Three levels of government are involved to some extent. It must be confusing at times on where are the lines of delineation among them. The same must be said about the relationships among the departments or branches of a single government; can this be clarified and each know exactly what is required? Probably it is too much to expect that this will ever be completely effective, but it is a problem which calls for action.

Similarly, financing of these measures is related to the administrative and legal side. Federal assistance in municipal sewage treatment costs have done much to ease the burden, but that industry which does not use the public sewers does not come within this orbit. The problem of financial assistance is complex, and it is difficult to assess the amount and from what sources this should come.

Summary

The foregoing is an attempt to review some of the problems and difficulties associated with water pollution. No effort has been made to provide detailed remedial measures. The discussions of this conference will no doubt examine these problems as well as many more. Only the surface of the field has been examined in this paper. Many more problems do exist and call for solutions. These matters are urgent: Tomorrow is today, and its problems are hurtling upon us. We need to solve those of today without delay and be prepared to meet those of the future.