Water & Air – Filter Systems News

In the sweltering heat of the summer you may have noticed the contrast between the high temperatures outside and the frigid indoor temperatures of certain buildings. In the New York Times‘ Sunday Review, Elisabeth Rosenthal noted this common disparity, pointing out how she often needs to wear a sweatshirt indoors when the weather outside is close to 100 degrees.

The recommended setting for a thermostat during the summer is 78 degrees, which helps conserve energy costs and fights against increasing greenhouse gas emissions. However, many homes and businesses set their thermostats to temperatures in the low 70s or high 60s. Many are aware of this trend, which explains why some will go to a movie theater simply to escape the heat.

Rosenthal explains that this is likely attributed to the expectation of having “January in July.” Alan Hedge, a Cornell University professor specializing in Design and Environmental Analysis, states that “in the United States there is a strong marketing emphasis on cold. When you get a soda it’s chock full of ice. We serve beer chilled. We make a virtue of freezing things.”

And certainly it’s the people being chilled too. Low indoor temperatures were once a necessary trend, but many wonder if it’s necessary now when air conditioning has become such a staple of residences. Businesses across the world have started to reduce what is known as “over-cooling.” Whether it’s Italian energy company Eni or Japan’s Cool Biz initiative to increase thermostats to around 80 degrees, the issue has been noted and solutions are being offered.

While some may enjoy the cold or not deem it necessary to do anything about over-cooling, Rosenthal argues that the rising cost of energy and the increase of greenhouse gas emissions make this is a necessary endeavor.

The primary cause of home indoor air quality problems, according to the EPA’s Indoor Air Quality website,  are indoor pollution sources that release harmful gases or particles into the air. Other factors that can contribute to poor indoor air quality are inadequate ventilation, and high temperature and humidity. Sources of indoor air pollution include combustion sources, building materials and furnishings, cabinetry or furniture made of pressed wood products, household cleaning and maintenance products, as well as personal care products, and central heating and cooling systems and humidification devices. Outdoor air pollution sources including radon and pesticides can also contribute to poor indoor air quality.

When there is too little outdoor air entering a home, health and comfort problems can arise from pollutants accumulating. Many houses are designed to prevent air from entering the house, which can cause pollutant levels to rise. This can cause immediate effects such as eye, nose, and throat irritation, headaches, dizziness, and fatigue. Other immediate effects include symptoms of diseases such as asthma, hypersensitivity pneumonitis, and humidifier fever. There are also long term health effects that may occur years after exposure or after long or repeated periods of exposure.  These include respiratory disease, heart disease, and cancer.

One solution to this problem is to install mechanical ventilation devices, such as outdoor-vented fans and also air handling systems. Air handling systems use fans and duct work to remove indoor air and bring in filtered and conditioned outdoor air into the house.  Filters Fast offers an extensive line of air filters to keep the air in your house clean and pure. We also carry many quality air purifiers that circulate and purify indoor air.

Cool, crisp, clean, clear water. In the hot summer days of August, there is nothing better. We run to the faucet or Brita Pitcher when temperatures reach over 100 degrees. Imagine a truly sizzling hot day, running for the tap, turning on the cold faucet and the water that comes out is not the regular water you are used to, but cleaned wastewater. As the name implies, cleaned wastewater is water that “has been used in your toilet or sink or shower is purified through a variety of technological processes that make it clean enough to drink” (Alix Spiegel, NPR Article)  Would you feel the same relief from the heat? Or would your mind stop you from enjoying the cool glass of water?

Some scholars say yes.  Dr. Carol Nemeroff, of the University of Southern Maine speculates that many people are not able to get over the “ick” factor of drinking water that could have previously been found in their toilet. The scientific term, contagion, refers to the phenomenon of people thinking that once something has contact with another thing, those two things are always joined. In this case, water and your toilet.  Significant research of over 2,000 people suggests that it is difficult for people to dispel this kind of thinking; regardless of if it is scientifically proven that the cleaned wastewater is safe for consumption.

Therefore, getting Americans on board for the use of wastewater as drinking water may involve less science, and more psychology. The key it seems is to change the identity of the filtered water by connecting it closer to nature. As water reuse expert Dr. Haddad says, people feel more comfortable if the treated water sits in an underground aquifer for a significant period of time. However, this brings up additional problems, as exposing already treated water back to nature can have negative effects on the quality of the water.

It is clear that our water thinking has a significant impact on the way water is used and distributed in this country. Now that we have the science to turn wastewater into drinkable water, we need to find a way to change its identity so that people no longer have visions of drinking water formally found in the bottom of a bath tub or toilet bowl.

When most people think about icebergs, visions of the Titanic teetering precariously in the Atlantic Ocean often pop into their heads.  These gigantic sources of frozen, fresh water dot the oceans around the world. More than just a site to see from the bow of a cruise ship, French eco-entrepreneur Georges Mougin, sees icebergs as a solution to the world’s water crisis.

Over 40 years ago, Mougin first began exploring the possibility that the world’s icebergs could be used as source of fresh water for those in need. Today, it may become a reality.  Mougin has invented a way to transport these gigantic icebergs with an insulated harness that will reduce melting.  With the assistance of a tow, the iceberg will ride on ocean currents to those countries that need it most. To assist with this invention, 3D computer simulations have been created to demonstrate that one tugboat from Newfoundland can transport as much as 7 million tons of iceberg to the Canary Islands in as little as five months.

Watch a simulation of towing the iceberg here:

The drawbacks of this amazing technology are as you might have guessed, cost. To tow the iceberg from Newfoundland to the Canary Islands would cost approximately $9.8 million dollars. However, Mougin is hoping to raise enough funds to sponsor a smaller trip from the Antarctic to Australia. If successful, the iceberg, weighing in at 30-million tons will provide enough water for 500,000 people for an entire year.

Since 1972, the Clean Water Act has protected our streams, rivers, lakes, and other waterways from being polluted by industry. This legislation has served as a model for other countries since its inception. Now, there are forces at work in the U.S. that would dismantle this landmark law and make it easier for industries to discharge pollutants into our waters. Last month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2018, the so-called Clean Water Cooperative Federalism Act of 2011, which gives states more control over whether restrictions of industrial sources are tightened or relaxed. If passed, federal oversight would be lessened, and those states that desire to give industry less restriction would have more leeway to allow pollution into public waters. Presently, when a certain state isn’t tough enough on polluters, the Clean Water Act allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to step in and police that state’s industries more closely. If H.R. 2018 passes the Senate and is signed into law by the President, (who has threatened to veto the bill) we could see a return to the state of affairs that dominated the U.S. prior to 1972, when our waters were grossly polluted.

The assault on the Clean Water Act doesn’t stop with H.R. 2018. A Senate committee has approved H.R. 872, with the partisan sounding title “the Reducing Regulatory Burdens Act of 2011.” If passed, those who would spray pesticides into U.S. waters will face less restrictions and oversight than now presented under the Clean Water Act.

The Clean Water Act has protected the waters of our country for almost 40 years. Even with this safeguard in place, the quality of many waterways has continued to decline. Those who would see the Clean Water Act dismantled see this decline as evidence of the Act’s ineffectiveness and a reason to ease restrictions. If anything, this shows that greater regulations are needed.

Instead of focusing on a Water Charity this Tuesday, we chose nonprofit organization Project WET. This organization focuses on water education through reaching out to teachers, community members, children, and parents in the United States and around the world. Project WET achieves this goal through publishing informative water materials in different languages, creating school curriculum for different age groups, and sponsoring trainings around the world. Project WET also organizes community water events such as the Global Water Education Village. This event is held every three years at the World Water Forum, the last one was held in Istanbul, Turkey. The goal of the Global Water Education Village is to discuss local actions in water education that are successful at reaching children.

Project WET is committed to reaching out to audiences around the world and in ushering water education into the twenty-first century.  Most recently, Project WET has teamed up with the National Park Service.  In a press release issued on June 22, 2011, Project WET and the National Park Service announced that they would be collaborating on an educational series titled, “Discover the Waters of Our National Parks.”  This science based program will include hands-on activities, videos, special workshops, online courses, guides and an internet portal. Project WET President, Dennis Nelson stated, “Water connects our national parks to each other and to the people of the United States through the water cycle, making national parks a perfect springboard for educating people about water.” This project is going be launched at select national parks within the next year, so keep a look out at your local park!

Project WET’s website offers lots of links for parents, educators, corporations and museums.  If you want to get involved, there are plenty of avenues for that, too. Of course, you can donate on their secure website in any amount you choose, but you can also choose some more innovative ways as well. For example, you can sponsor a classroom and provide a Water and Sustainability Kit which includes copies of various activity and educational booklets for every child.  If you want to be more hands on, you can train to become a Project WET facilitator. After completing the course, you can deliver workshops to teachers and educators in your area. A great way to get involved in your community for a worthy cause!

So this week, Project WET is our pick for a great water focused organization. If you’re a teacher, parent or just someone interested in making a difference through water education, be sure to check out Project WET!

“Many civilizations have been crippled or destroyed by an inability to understand water or manage it. We have a huge advantage over the generations of people who have come before us, because we can understand water and we can use it smartly.”

– Charles Fishman, The Big Thirst: The Secret Life and Turbulent Future of Water

Charles Fishman, bestselling author of The Wal-Mart Effect has most recently turned his attention to water. The leap from discounted mega-giant to Earth’s most essential resource may seem like a big one, but Fishman is interested in relationships-whether it’s to Wal-Mart or water.  Fishman first began his flirtation with water in a 2007 article entitled, “Message in a Bottle”, published in Fast Company magazine. In this piece Fishman lamented, “Thirty years ago, bottled water barely existed as a business in the United States. Last year, we spent more on Poland Spring, Fiji Water, Evian, Aquafina, and Dasani than we spent on iPods or movie tickets– $15 billion. It will be $16 billion this year” (Fishman, 2007).

Fast forward to 2011, and Fishman tackles both the history and future of water in our world. The Big Thirst seeks to open people’s eyes to the reality of water in the twenty-first century. Similar to what the book and film, Fast Food Nation did for revealing the atrocities of the United States fast food industry, Thirst delves into people’s water consciousness. For example, do you know where your water goes when it swirls down the drain, flushes down the toilet or leaves your washing machine? A majority of Americans have no idea.

Also consider that most Americans don’t know where the majority of their daily water usage comes from. Do you? In 1999, a group of researchers used electronic water-flow sensors in 1,888 homes for four weeks. The results showed that the primary way American’s use water daily is by flushing the toilet. About five times a day per person if you want to put a figure on it. We literally flush 5.7 billion gallons of water down the toilet a day (Fishman, 2011).

The Big Thirst’s strength stems from Fishman’s ability to storytell. He connects you to your relationship with water in a multitude of ways. Take for example, this excerpt, “Like so much of modern life, safe, reliable water and sewer service is both essential and a complete mystery. We have no idea where our water comes from, we have no idea what happens to it when the dishwasher is done with it. We have no idea what effort is required to get the water to us, and no idea what’s required to get rid of it. That ignorance doesn’t matter, until things start to go wrong.”

Water is an essential resource in our daily lives- and most of us do not understand how much we rely on it, how much goes into getting it to our faucet, and what we would do if it were to stop flowing freely. Charles Fishman explores these questions through fascinating stories intertwining his personal travels to the water bottling plants of San Pellegrino, Italy and Poland Spring, Maine.  The main question being, why don’t we value our most essential resource the way we should?

Matt Damon is trying to save the world.

This may sound like a line from a movie trailer, but Matt Damon’s non-profit organization, Water.org, is trying to save those 1 billion people around the world that do not have clean water.  In 2009, co- founder Gary White’s WaterPartners merged with Damon’s H20 Africa and Water.org was born. Damon and White have set out to find new financing models and long lasting solutions to the world’s water crisis.

Water.org focuses on drilling new wells in those desperate communities that need them most. When the community in need requests a project, one of Water.org’s local partners evaluates the request and then works directly with the team at Water.org to create a funding plan. While this may seem counterintuitive, the people at Water.org believe, “During the past 20 years, we have found that demand-driven projects are far more sustainable than projects where an outsider makes the decision to provide a project.” In places like Bhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, where 31 million people do not have clean water, Matt Damon and the people at Water.org are using grants and WaterCredit programs to address safe water needs in both rural and urban areas.

Water.org’s WaterCredit program is one of the organizations innovative ways to combat the world water crisis. Since grants alone are not enough to reach the billion people in need of fresh, clean water, the WaterCredit program gives small loans to individuals and communities so they can address their own water needs. This not only gives people the power to solve their own communities’ water crisis, it also yields more long term success. Water.org has invested over $2.9 million dollars in WaterCredit programs, with success stories coming from all parts of Bangladesh, India, and Kenya.

In India, a woman named S. Gandhamani took out a WaterCredit loan to install a new water tap outside of her home. Today, Gandhamani now has access to fresh water daily.  The wastewater that runs from the drainage around the tap has now allowed her to start a flourishing garden of banana trees. Gandhamani sells these bananas at market and brings in extra money for her family.

So how can you help Matt Damon and Water.org?  You can donate money in any amount you like over their secure website. They also offer the option to donate in someone else’s name, and they will send a “Gift of Water” card to the recipient. Water.org also launched their sister website, My.Water.org- which allows you to track various communities around the world where Water.org is making a difference. Similar to Twitter, you are able to comment and communicate with people who are involved with Water.Org.  This is an inventive way for people to see where their donations are going, and to see how different communities, such as La Kabouy, in Haiti, are progressing. So this week, our Charity Tuesday choice is Water.org- and it’s not just because Matt Damon is a total stud.

With about 800,000 gallons of water you could grow an acre of cotton, brew over 500 barrels of beer, or supply seven NHL playoff games. If that number seems a bit high for an ice hockey match, know that the NHL thinks so too, which is why NHL Green, the National Hockey League’s sustainability initiative, is collaborating with the Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) for the NHL Water Restoration Project.

As reported in the New York Times, BEF, based in Oregon, aims to conserve water in the Pacific Northwest, though it is looking to expand to Washington, California, Colorado, and New Mexico in the future. The organization encourages water conservation with “water certificates.” Each certificate is “divided into 1,000-gallon increments, assigned serial numbers and sold to companies and individuals. Each credit retails for one dollar. Bonneville then pays water-rights holders to conserve water.”

The NHL has gotten involved with the organization and its water certificates for its recently hosted 2011 Stanley Cup Finals, the first “water neutral” series in NHL history. The water conservation effort is useful as hosting a playoff game involves water output in the form of ice, concessions, fountains, faucets, toilets, and resurfacing the ice.

With this program the NHL will use their water certificate credits to restore nearly one million gallons to the Deschutes River, which is between Lake Billy Chinook and Bend, Oregon.

“It is a scenic gem with the potential to support world-class recreation and functioning aquatic ecosystems,” the NHL stated in a press release.  “However, water rights holders, individuals who in addition to property ownership possess a legal right to remove river water for ‘beneficial economic use’, divert most of the river’s water at Bend.  These disruptions of stream flow have degraded habitats, resulting in poor water quality and a decline in the overall health of the river.  The NHL Water Restoration Project will help return the Middle Deschutes to the vibrant watercourse it once was.”

The NHL is now the first major sports organization to participate in the BEF’s water certificate program and also the first to make such a large push towards water conservation. It notes that many of its players first got started playing on ice ponds, so it’s imperative that they set an environmental standard for the future and for the future of ice hockey.

Is Australian chef Mark Best justified in charging for tap water at Marque Restaurant, his restaurant in Syndey, Australia?

Best stopped selling “boutique bottled water” and instead offered customers treated tap water for about half the price of the bottled water he previously sold, according to a Reuters article. He did so because he considers these bottled waters to be wasteful and wanted to provide an eco-friendly alternative.

Best installed a water filter system that filters, chills and carbonates the Marque Restaurant‘s tap water. And while he could have raised his pricing across his menu to make up the cost, he wanted everyone to know they were being charged for tap water. He charges the equivalent of $5.31 in US dollars for all the tap water a patron cares to drink. The 500 ml bottles of boutique bottled water that he sold in the past cost twice that much.

“I’m not highly political but I want to make people aware and this is just one initiative,” Best said.

While many patrons were unhappy about it, charging for tap water is not illegal if it has been treated — and Best’s $6,000 Italian-made water filtration system certainly does that.

If Best’s main goal in charging for tap water was to make a statement and “raise awareness of the need for restaurants to be socially responsible and reduce plastic waste,” we would say he succeeded. What do you think: is Best justified in charging for tap water or not?