By Blake Jackson
Kentucky is considering changes to regulations for applying treated sewage sludge, also known as biosolids, to farmland as fertilizer. This proposal has raised concerns among farmers and environmental advocates.
Biosolids contain nutrients beneficial for crops but may also harbor harmful contaminants like heavy metals and emerging chemicals like PFAs. While some Kentucky farmers use biosolids as a cost-effective fertilizer alternative, concerns exist about potential risks to their land, crops, livestock, and ultimately, public health.
Currently, regulations require permits, testing, and standards for biosolids used as fertilizer. However, proposed changes aim to streamline the process, aligning Kentucky with federal regulations that only mandate testing for a limited number of pollutants.
Critics argue that these federal regulations are outdated and fail to address the full range of potential contaminants in biosolids. They point to a 2018 EPA Inspector General report highlighting the lack of standards for hundreds of pollutants detected in biosolids, including some classified as hazardous.
Opponents of the changes fear weaker regulations could lead to:
- Reduced accountability for cities managing wastewater treatment plants.
- Increased risk of farmland contamination, impacting crops and livestock.
- Creation of future environmental cleanup liabilities for contaminated land.
The Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet acknowledges the presence of "forever chemicals" like PFAs in biosolids, especially from treatment plants handling industrial waste. While the EPA is developing regulations to limit public exposure to PFAs due to health risks, the proposed changes in Kentucky wouldn't require cities to test for these contaminants or inform farmers of their presence.
Critics argue this lack of transparency could lead to situations similar to those in other states where biosolids application caused severe contamination, prompting bans.
A key concern is the absence of mandatory testing for all known contaminants before land application. Farmers wouldn't be informed about potential pollutants beyond a vague mention of "constituents from an industrial pretreatment program." This raises concerns about potential harm to farmers' health, land productivity, and the safety of their crops.
Opponents argue that protecting public health, farmland, and the environment necessitates stricter regulations. They propose requiring thorough testing, informed consent from farmers, and exploring alternative, responsible waste management solutions for cities unable to ensure "clean" biosolids.
The debate boils down to balancing the short-term cost-saving benefits for cities in disposing of wastewater sludge against the long-term consequences for farmers, public health, and the environment. A more responsible approach that prioritizes testing, transparency, and informed consent is needed to safeguard Kentucky's agricultural sector and the well-being of its citizens.
Photo Credit: gettyimages-imaginegolf
Categories: Kentucky, General