Sewage, Biosolids, Reclaimed Wastewater Spreading Infectious Waste
Editor’s Note: Deadly prions are found in the urine, feces, blood, saliva and tissue of human and animals infected with prion disease, including Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Alzheimer’s, Chronic Wasting disease, and Mad Cow disease. Infected fluids from hospitals, dental offices, morgues, crematories, slaughterhouses, and more make it to many local sewage plants. Prions are unstoppable. Sewage treatment has little, if any effect on prions. Just ask the U.S. EPA or the Canadian government agencies. Therefore, prions survive and live on through sewage sludge and reclaimed water. Prion diseases are recycled when sewage sludge and reclaimed water are applied to crops, parks, golf courses and beyond. Many areas are even reclaiming sewage water and sending it to the taps in homes. This is a really bad idea.
When sewage is applied to land, the prions are washed into groundwater, creeks, rivers, lakes and oceans. A new study from the University of Wisconsin has found that plants (vegetables and crops used for animal feed) exposed to prions, become infected with prions and can transmit deadly prion disease. Therefore, applying human sewage from thousands of people infected with Alzheimer’s disease and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is transmitting deadly prions directly into our food and water supply. Cheers to Victoria, B.C. for having the vision and courage to reject the BS and pathogens being spread by the sewage industry and many regulators around the world. In fact, sewage sludge is likely contributing to the spread of Chronic Wasting disease. Though not the only cause of prion disease, pissing in the pool in the age of a deadly prion epidemic is not a good idea. It’s time to rethink and reform sewage disposal policies around the world. The epidemic is real. More than 40 million people around the world have dementia now and it’s expected to get much worse. Prion diseases are always deadly. There is no prevention other than your wits. There is no cure. The book available on this website goes into much more detail.
In a move projected to add millions of dollars to the cost of treating Greater Victoria’s sewage, Capital Regional District politicians Wednesday overwhelmingly decided against overturning a 2011 ban on treating land with sewage sludge. The decision came after some six hours of presentations and debate. More than a dozen residents spoke in opposition to the change.
CRD staff had recommended that directors reconsider the policy, which would have maintained a ban on applying biosolids on agricultural land used for food production, but would have opened the door for use in applications such as silviculture, mine reclamation, fertilizer soil amendments, landscaping and forage crops. But many directors said changing the policy wasn’t worth the risk.
“At the end of the day, I’ve got more questions than answers,” said North Saanich director Ted Daly. “I think based on the information I’ve heard today, I feel, personally, there’s more downside than upside to reverse our policy.”
Highlands alternate director Karel Roessingh said the potential liability issues are huge.
“This has the potential to be something that you just can’t clean up, and that worries me — that the metals will gather and things that we don’t know are in the stuff will gather. It’s like the plastic in the ocean. It’s something you just cannot deal with,” he said.
The CRD banned use of sludge on land in 2011 amid worries that farmland and the food grown on it could be polluted by pharmaceuticals and heavy metals. Then the CRD planned to dry the sludge left over from sewage treatment as fuel for cement kilns. But experts say the market for it simply isn’t there. Without a buyer, and the policy banning land application in place, staff say there are few options. The policy change would have brought the CRD in line with what staff said is common practice throughout North America.
“The science coming out of peer-reviewed, established research programs indicates that biosolids applications that follow regulatory guidance and best-management practices do not result in adverse effects to the environment or human health,” the staff report said.
Langford director Denise Blackwell said she supported the change.
“To me, the information that I’ve seen by credible scientists … leads me to believe we should give ourselves more options,” Blackwell said.
The move also had the potential to eliminate the need for a $35-million biosolids drying facility, the report said.
And Brenda Eaton, chairwoman of the civilian commission overseeing the sewage treatment project, warned failure to change the policy could mean the treatment project budget might have to be increased by $38 million to build an incinerator to burn the sludge.
But some CRD directors warned that changing the policy would have the effect of turning over the decision of whether to allow land application of sludge to the commission.
To do that, said Metchosin Mayor John Ranns, would be “utterly irresponsible.”
“I have seen absolutely no evidence that the public wants this,” Ranns said. “This is strictly the commission wanting to save a buck — and I can’t blame them for that, but our responsibility goes far beyond that.”