Thank You Ocean Report

The Thank You Ocean Report focuses on interesting and exciting California ocean topics such as marine mammals, the latest news on ocean health, timely ocean issues and fascinating ocean facts. Stories feature interviews with ocean experts, explorers, scientists, conservationists, government and business leaders. Listeners learn about ocean activities and recreation, surfing, fishing, boating, and the many ways we all can thank the ocean through conservation and stewardship.

Ways to Reduce Urban Runoff

Ways to Reduce Urban Runoff [2:13m]: Play Now | Download (210)

Ways to Reduce Urban Runoff David Beckman, Director of NRDC’s Coastal Water Quality Project, says that urban runoff is the largest source of water pollution to California’s coast. On this program he shares some easy ways to lower the environmental impact of our existing homes. (Photo courtesy of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services)

For more information, visit:

Tags: water pollution

This entry was posted on Monday, August 11th, 2008 at 8:00 am and is filed under Ways to Help the Ocean. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

One Response to “Ways to Reduce Urban Runoff”

Peter Maier Says:
August 11th, 2008 at 11:03 am
It is amazing how people can claim what the largest pollution is, when there hardly is any data. We recently had a TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) study done and they tested non-point sources for 12 different pollutants, while there is no actual flow data available, this while we have a lot of actual flow data from sewage treatment plants but with only two pollutant test data. How one can even calculate a TMDL with this data is a miracle.

This TMDL program clearly is a cover-up attempt of the fact that EPA failed to implement the Clean Water Act as it was intended. It was supposed to be a technology based program, meaning that everybody treating sewage had to do this with best available treatment technology (and not based on what the water quality is of receiving waters, as the TMDL program does) and its goal was the elimination of all water pollution by 1985.

Sadly EPA used a commonly uses pollution test incorrectly and ignored all the pollution caused by nitrogenous (urine and protein) waste. And even tough EPA (and NRDC) acknowledged this incorrect us in 1984, EPA in stead (without any opposition of NRDC) of correcting this essential test, allowed another test, whereby it officially ignored all the pollution caused by nitrogenous waste. This waste, like fecal (carbonaceous) waste not only exerts an oxygen demand, but in all its forms is a fertilizer for algae and thus responsible for the eutrophication (in extreme cases ‘dead zones’) of our open waters.

So before we start any other program, we first should demand that EPA implement the CWA as was intended and promised. Allowing the continued use of a faulty test, which also makes it impossible to evaluate the real performance of a sewage treatment plants and what their effluents waste loading is on receiving waters, should be unacceptable. Especially since this also can lead to sewage treatment plants designed to treat the wrong waste in raw sewage, as is the case in many locations and also the reason authorities refuse to correct this test.