By Nina B. Elkadi for Sentient.
Broadcast version by Joe Ulery for Indiana News Service reporting for the Sentient-Public News Service Collaboration

Approximately 122 million people are exposed to potentially toxic byproducts in their drinking water. The possibly toxic mix is the result of organic material, like manure, interacting with disinfectants in the treatment process. According to a new report by the environmental non-profit Environmental Working Group, when the manure and other organic materials interact with chlorine, the result is a chemical byproduct that raises a number of health risks, including some that may have long-lasting health consequences for consumers.

“It’s not just that there’s manure in your water and that’s unsafe, but it’s that manure and other organic materials are then triggering these unsafe contaminants,” Environmental Working Group Midwest Director Anne Schechinger tells Sentient.

The 1.7 billion animals raised for consumption in the United States produce approximately 941 billion pounds of manure each year. Smaller water systems and residents living on private wells are especially vulnerable to agricultural pollution, but this new report raises another concern. The problem with disinfection byproducts — of specific concern in this report are trihalomethanes (TTHMs) — reaches cities including New York City and Los Angeles, which each had at least one test above the maximum contaminant level (MCL) set by the Environmental Protection Agency in the last five years.

From 2019 to 2023, the five years this report covers, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (that serves the Washington D.C. suburb in Maryland) tested above the MCL level 218 times. TTHMs can form when chlorine interacts with a host of organic matter ranging from dead vegetation to, as this report states, manure.

In a 2021 notice the EPA drafted for water utilities to notify residents that they have high levels of TTHMs in their water, the regulators wrote: “Some people who drink water containing trihalomethane in excess of the MCL over many years may experience problems with their liver, kidneys, or central nervous system, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.” Four years later, the regulatory landscape looks very different — the EPA is moving to dismantle Clean Water Act protections and the phrase “Safe Drinking Water” is banned at the Department of Agriculture.

The new report from EWG states that six of the 10 systems that tested at or above the maximum containment level at least once “are also listed among the states with the most livestock.” EWG cites research that documents how runoff from animal farms, and swine farms in particular, can contain extremely high levels of precursors that can turn into harmful chemicals during the disinfection process. Dairies are a major culprit too.

As cities grapple with multiple hot-button water issues from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to nitrate, the list of things to filter out seems to be continuing to grow. Water experts say disinfection byproducts like TTHMs could be filtered out with new technology targeting PFAS, if that regulation sticks.

‘Clean’ Water?

“What unknown things that we don’t yet know are in our drinking water” are the “bread and butter” of Susan Richardson’s lab. Richardson is a professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of South Carolina, where she has been studying disinfection byproduct chemicals for around 30 years.

When we treat water, Richardson says, we’re killing harmful microbes. “But the problem is that the disinfection byproducts are an unintended consequence of trying to kill harmful pathogens,” she says.

Richardson says the interaction between the disinfectants and natural organic matter like manure can result in disinfection byproducts — as do tea leaves, algae and many other things produced in nature.

In 2024, the Biden Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency passed a new regulation to address PFAS, requiring public utilities to comply with new maximum contaminant levels in treated water.

Richardson’s opinion is that the regulatory approach to PFAS was rushed, and yet the outcome could have a silver lining. As utilities look to install new systems to filter out the PFAS, the systems can include filters that remove other contaminants too.

Certain filters, like granular activated carbon filters, can take out the precursor chemicals that lead to disinfection byproducts like TTHMs. They aren’t cheap. Richardson lives in Columbia, South Carolina, where the water plant serves around 375,000 customers. Installing that type of filtration system would cost the city approximately $200 million — not to mention approximately $24 million per year on upkeep.

In 2024, the EPA announced $1 billion in funding for communities and people on private wells impacted by PFAS contamination. Cities like Columbia plan to use this to partially fund their projects, if the funding remains.

A Defunded Landscape

The EWG report recommends starting to fix the problem at the source, in this case, they argue, on the farm. But under the Trump administration, funding for on-the-farm conservation practices aimed to reduce pollution in waterways is currently paused.

“When you take away hundreds of millions of dollars from cover crops and stream buffers and filter strips, you’re also taking away a reduction in nitrate and manure and other contaminants running off farm fields,” Schechinger says.

The Trump administration has not publicly commented on the future of PFAS, but just a few days ago, an anonymous EPA employee told the Guardian that the agency is considering a more lax approach to regulating chemicals such as PFAS.

“I think we have good water,” Richardson says, holding up her water bottle. “I’m drinking it. But, I think we can do better. I know we can do better, and I want us to do better.”


Nina B. Elkadi wrote this article for Sentient.


get more stories like this via email

As Michigan faces growing concerns over landfill emissions, researchers have launched the third phase of a major methane detection study which could bring much-needed answers.

Methane is one of the most potent greenhouse gases. The study, funded by the Environmental Research and Education Foundation, in partnership with FluxLab, tests methane detection technologies under real-world conditions. Earlier tests using drones, trucks, and towers showed big differences in detection. The third phase adds satellites, aircraft, overnight tests, and detailed weather and terrain data.

Bryan Staley, president and CEO of the foundation, shared the most surprising part of the study.

"Even just detecting the methane releases with these high-tech approaches was not as straightforward as we thought it would be," Staley explained. "The work that we have undertaken is helping advance that ball pretty quickly to get a better understanding of why that was happening and how we can make improvements with those technologies."

With more than 40 active landfills, Michigan ranks among the top 10 methane polluters, driven by high waste volumes and imports. A 2023 law boosted state efforts to improve methane capture and detection.

In the first two phases of the study, researchers tested at a closed landfill in Canada. Results showed no clear front-runner. The second phase incorporated weather and wind factors, with input from global tech providers. Those results are forthcoming.

Staley emphasized detecting methane where waste is placed is common but there are cases where its presence in a landfill raises concerns.

"It would be more concerning if you're seeing methane coming from an area of the landfill that is not receiving the waste," Staley pointed out. "Those are the kinds of emissions that should be detected and mitigated for and basically fixed."

The Environmental Protection Agency tracks landfill emissions but outdated methods may underestimate them by half. New rules also aim to curb underreported methane.

A District Court judge in Iowa has ruled in favor of an effort to protect the state's wetlands.

The legal move protects a key environmental provision, known as Swampbuster.

The Union of Concerned Scientists says 30 million acres of wetlands in the Upper Midwest are responsible for preventing at least $23 billion per year in residential flood loss costs.

The Iowa Environmental Council's General Counsel Michael Schmidt said the court ruling was crucial in protecting those sensitive areas.

"It is important because it protects wetlands in agricultural areas that would otherwise probably be farmed over," said Schmidt. "Those wetlands are important because they reduce flooding downstream, they provide really important habitat for wildlife, and they improve water quality by filtering the water that moves through them."

Critics of Swampbuster and other environmental conservation provisions call them unconstitutional, and claim they infringe on land owners' property rights.

At least half of the state's lakes are closed for recreation in the summer because they are polluted with runoff from nearby animal confinement operations.

Schmidt said reducing the environmental benefits of wetland protections would have made matters worse, especially as the number of severe flooding events is on the rise.

"Wetlands also provide the water quality benefits," said Schmidt, "that are really important for drinking water, because we have some significant drinking water problems in the state as well. "

Swampbuster and other environmental provisions are part of the Farm Bill, which is up for renewal, but is already more than two years behind schedule.



get more stories like this via email

Southwest Wisconsin is seeing a surge in clean energy, emerging as a hotbed for large-scale renewable projects proponents said are economically benefiting the community.

About 10% of Wisconsin's electricity is from renewable sources. The industry employs about 6,500 people and invests $15.5 million a year in property, state and local taxes, and more than $15 million annually in land lease payments.

Kaden Crapp, field representative for the Wisconsin Land and Liberty Coalition, said along with the economic benefits, clean energy has the potential to provide the state with autonomy.

"One of the biggest benefits that including these renewable energies into the state grid can bring is that we can start becoming a net exporter," Crapp explained. "By being able to create our own Wisconsin-grown energy and be able to distribute it to other states as well."

Several proposed projects are slated for the area including the Whitetail Energy Center, the Badger Hollow Wind Energy Center and the Uplands Wind project. Each is projected to generate millions of dollars annually and collectively produce hundreds of megawatts of energy to power homes and businesses across the state.

Amy Seeboth-Wilson, director of grants for Southwest Wisconsin Technical College, said the school is leading the pack in innovation in the renewable energy space. She noted it offers degrees to prepare students for the rising industry and is the first in the Wisconsin Technical College system to install solar arrays with batteries.

"I think a lot of people appreciate how Southwest Tech is leaning into technological innovation and demonstrating how it can be really useful as a way to save money, and how it can benefit our communities," Seeboth-Wilson observed. "There's a lot of excitement around having that conversation and it's been exciting to be a part of that."

Josh Bedward, director of facilities for Southwest Tech, said the solar arrays offer a dual benefit by saving them about $30,000 annually in utility costs while serving as a battery backup, ensuring continuous service to students even during utility outages.

"By saving that $30,000 on our operating cost, that allows us to reinvest in programs and our students," Bedward pointed out. "That's something that we'll be able to continue to invest back into them."

The renewable-energy influx has faced some controversy with critics saying they replace some of the state's agricultural uses. Opponents say less than 2% of Wisconsin's 14 million acres of agricultural land would be needed to reach the state's clean-energy goals.