7/
pounds of phosphates were discharged in 1968, up 248.4 million pounds from
\
1957 de”spite the removal of progessively larger quantities during this period
by advanced treatment at municipal sewage plants.
Estimated tocause almost 20 percent of all river pollution were agricul—
tural activities that produced siltation, organic and inorganic nutrients from
divestock, pesticide and herbicide runoif, and salinity. These conditions were
Î
actually the predominant causes of river pollution in the Northern and South—
ern Plains states west of the Mississippi River. Another six percent of the pol—
lutiOn in US. rivers was attributed to other causes, such as sedimentation due
to construction and dredging. About ve percent of the pollution was caused
by mining procedures that dumped silt, acid, and brine into waterways—pri—
mary in the Appalachian coal mining region where mine drainage has pol—
luted some 10,500 miles of streams in eight states [6]. Lesser amounts of pol—
lution were caused by accidental spills, urban wastes such as street litter, and
discharges from electrical generating plants that included hot water, radio—
actiVe material, and airborne wastes.
Modern Technology and lncreased Pollution
î l —ç
In brder to relate these data more closely to the nature of the human activity
CàùSing [the pollution, EPAanalysts compared the rate of population growth
1
du11ng
With the increase in annual production (before treatment)
0fBOD They estimated that if the rise in BOD levels in domestic sewage had
'
_
been
proporüonate ”to population growth, the 1968 gure would
‘
'
havebeenonlyä30—miion pounds more than in 1964. Instead, there was an
mcreased‘f 900mlién pounds of BOD from 1964—1968. Similarly, expansion
Â_£Ï
ofmdustrral output to accommodate increased population at precisely the
leveland fcompoéition of per capita consumption in 1964 would have added
about9%nulhonpounds=to the BOD production gure instead of the much
largermcreasegf
that actually occurred in 1968. Furtheralone would have accounted for a rise of only 23
'
total of phosphorus compounds in sanitary sew122.8 million pound increase reected in the 1968 total.
Thus, these analyses showed that only slightly more than 16 percent of the total increase d£r‘:‘8110 million pounds in the annual domestic and industrial
through 1968 could be attributed directly to populatlon,mcreaseandrthgt only about 19 percent of the phosphorus waste increasecouldbesoattrlbuth Part of the increase was more apparent than
leal»smœ'Chëseguiesdid n0t includewaste from towns and rural areas not
serv1eed by
fhe. population receiving this service
rose between 19643d1968 Tlsfaétor*was responsible for a seven percent
mcrease m
than
percent increase i in phosphorus
wastes
over
place
new -sewer*«building merely
,
‘
Large balances Oflelncreasesm bOÜ1BOD and phosphorus, were” still
unaccounted f0r’ howeverEPAanalÿ3tsïÇX&Îhihed'therelationship between
,
”
”“…“! Technology
,
'
pounds of phosphates were discharged in 1968, up 248.4 million pounds from
\
1957 de”spite the removal of progessively larger quantities during this period
by advanced treatment at municipal sewage plants.
Estimated tocause almost 20 percent of all river pollution were agricul—
tural activities that produced siltation, organic and inorganic nutrients from
divestock, pesticide and herbicide runoif, and salinity. These conditions were
Î
actually the predominant causes of river pollution in the Northern and South—
ern Plains states west of the Mississippi River. Another six percent of the pol—
lutiOn in US. rivers was attributed to other causes, such as sedimentation due
to construction and dredging. About ve percent of the pollution was caused
by mining procedures that dumped silt, acid, and brine into waterways—pri—
mary in the Appalachian coal mining region where mine drainage has pol—
luted some 10,500 miles of streams in eight states [6]. Lesser amounts of pol—
lution were caused by accidental spills, urban wastes such as street litter, and
discharges from electrical generating plants that included hot water, radio—
actiVe material, and airborne wastes.
Modern Technology and lncreased Pollution
î l —ç
In brder to relate these data more closely to the nature of the human activity
CàùSing [the pollution, EPAanalysts compared the rate of population growth
1
du11ng
With the increase in annual production (before treatment)
0fBOD They estimated that if the rise in BOD levels in domestic sewage had
'
_
been
proporüonate ”to population growth, the 1968 gure would
‘
'
havebeenonlyä30—miion pounds more than in 1964. Instead, there was an
mcreased‘f 900mlién pounds of BOD from 1964—1968. Similarly, expansion
Â_£Ï
ofmdustrral output to accommodate increased population at precisely the
leveland fcompoéition of per capita consumption in 1964 would have added
about9%nulhonpounds=to the BOD production gure instead of the much
largermcreasegf
that actually occurred in 1968. Furtheralone would have accounted for a rise of only 23
'
total of phosphorus compounds in sanitary sew122.8 million pound increase reected in the 1968 total.
Thus, these analyses showed that only slightly more than 16 percent of the total increase d£r‘:‘8110 million pounds in the annual domestic and industrial
through 1968 could be attributed directly to populatlon,mcreaseandrthgt only about 19 percent of the phosphorus waste increasecouldbesoattrlbuth Part of the increase was more apparent than
leal»smœ'Chëseguiesdid n0t includewaste from towns and rural areas not
serv1eed by
fhe. population receiving this service
rose between 19643d1968 Tlsfaétor*was responsible for a seven percent
mcrease m
than
percent increase i in phosphorus
wastes
over
place
new -sewer*«building merely
,
‘
Large balances Oflelncreasesm bOÜ1BOD and phosphorus, were” still
unaccounted f0r’ howeverEPAanalÿ3tsïÇX&Îhihed'therelationship between
,
”
”“…“! Technology
,
'