Catoctin/Fauquier contact

Catoctin/Fauquier contact
Power washing a quarry block near Aldie, VA that preserves a soft sediment contact of the Fauquier Formation cap carbonate and pillow basalt of the Catoctin Formation.

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Do the chemicals in our rivers tell us who we are?


Leonardo da Vinci provided us with profound hydrologic insight, albeit unintentionally, when he stated, “In rivers, the water that you touch is the last of what has passed and the first of that which comes; so present with time.” Rivers continuously drain water from our landscapes and carry it to the oceans. After it rains, the water moves both over the land surface and underneath the ground towards the river.  When you look at a river you’re seeing the same water that once blanketed the land for a brief moment. As the water makes its way into the river, we often see it take small items along for the ride, like soils, stones, woodchips, newspapers, and empty soda cans. However, there is something else being carried that we don’t see; chemicals. Unlike heavy items like trash, the chemicals cannot settle out of the water downstream because they go through a transformation and instantly become a part of the water. Hydrologists call these chemicals the dissolved load of a river. As we apply nutrient fertilizers to our crops to grow food for our families, the chemicals (nitrate, phosphate) become a part of the dissolved load.  As we build our houses and roads, the chemicals (salts, carbonates) follow the pipes into our rivers. As we improve our quality of life and innovate new technologies, the chemicals of raw materials (sulfur, lead, arsenic, PCBs, PFOAs) enter the dissolved load.  As we drink more coffee, cure disease, and fight our wars, the chemicals involved (caffeine, hormones, amphetamines, antibacterials, radioactive uranium and tritium) show up in our rivers. 

Water discharge from a pipe (iStockphoto/Viktor Balabanov from ScienceDaily, 2008)


Although these chemicals in our rivers might be fascinating to anthropologists, they are catastrophic for our environment and our health. Nitrates and phosphates cause huge algal blooms in stagnant water (like beaches) that suck up all of the oxygen and kill fish, crabs, and other marine life. Salts, carbonates, and metals can create toxicity for the delicate plant life that relies on the water. These chemicals also attract invasive plants that are tougher, and that can outcompete the native species and eventually lead to a loss of biodiversity.  Organic chemicals like antibacterials, hormones, and plastics are carcinogenic for the animals that rely on the water and can cause reproductive issues, physical and mental abnormalities, and death. If these chemicals continue to show up in our rivers, we can ultimately lose the ecosystem services that we are dependent on for our quality of life, like seafood, clean drinking water, sewage disposal, and recreational spaces. If aliens ever landed on Earth and wanted to know more about us, I’d tell them to look in our water.

People have significantly altered the landscape, and the fingerprints of human activities show up in the water (Kaushal & Belt, 2012)




14 comments:

  1. I think that while it's tempting to use the term "chemicals" to broadly describe water contaminants, it can be a little too vague. "Artificial/anthropogenic" chemicals might be better with a brief definition. That's just my opinion, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with this. Maybe even use a qualifier like 'harmful' in addition.

      Delete
  2. What transformation does chemicals go through that make it a part of the water? Additionally, it might be useful to separate your writing into more than two paragraphs. Lastly, you do a good job presenting the science to a general environment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This was a good presentation, but please project to the back of the room, and make sure any terms in the illustration are explained in the text (unless they are self evident). Make sure to explain the chemical terms in words that the general audience would understand.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One thing you could do is talk a bit about how some of these water contaminates are remediated. Some of the general public my look at this and "live in fear". People usually want to know how they problem can be fixed. You might also gain a larger audience of people who want to help clean up waters.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Good talk, but there were a couple of long pauses. Be sure to define the acronyms in the figures.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think you spoke clearly and accessibly, but ended a bit abruptly. I also think that the last line of your blog might be an interesting way to introduce the topic. The da Vinci quote is neat, but it took me a few times to comprehend. That slowed me down when I first got started.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think you presented well. Your introduction in class was better than in the blog post. I think you could get to the point a bit faster. I would also not use chemical words like phosphate and nitrate but use fertilizer instead. Use words that people are more familiar with.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What are ways that scientist are dealing with these problems? I think it would be useful to try and reach the point of "well, we as a society are adding all of these terrible things to the ecosystem, but lucky for you scientist are working hard to clean up your mess".

    ReplyDelete
  9. What are ways that scientist are dealing with these problems? I think it would be useful to try and reach the point of "well, we as a society are adding all of these terrible things to the ecosystem, but lucky for you scientist are working hard to clean up your mess".

    ReplyDelete
  10. You come off well in terms of speaking, not too fast. Now, when you describe "chemicals" you say nitrate and phosphate. Is that all? I was under the impression those could also come from "natural" sources as well. Some of the words in your last paragraph could easily be replaced too. Example: instead of "carcinogenic" say "hazardous." Not a large change, but easily interpreted.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I like the way you start your blog with a quote. Chemicals in the river is a very general topic because chemicals have so many kinds. I would suggest to focus on one or two major chemicals which are important to our health. Otherwise, the audience may feel like learning nothing special from this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I liked your talk. It is related to our daily life, so that makes me interested. I think it would be even better if you talk more about the how the chemicals can be removed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete