My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Colorado Water Oct 2005
CWCB
>
Publications
>
DayForward
>
Colorado Water Oct 2005
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/27/2013 12:59:15 PM
Creation date
2/13/2013 11:10:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
2005
Title
Colroado Water
Author
Water Center of Colorado State University
Description
October 2005 Issue
Publications - Doc Type
Newsletter
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
tives from water districts, the county commissioner <br />and assessor, conservationists, retailers, economic <br />developers, a property rights foundation, realtors, <br />NECALG, and farmers. We described our study <br />and how it could help them plan for the economic <br />changes predicted to occur in this and other rural <br />communities. They, in turn, told us what informa- <br />tion they were seeking from us. It was very moti- <br />vating to see that my research indeed matters and <br />will be used by real people for real issues. <br />My advisor, Dr. James Pritchett, and I co- authored <br />a fact sheet for each river basin in my study which <br />will be published on the Colorado State University <br />- College of Agricultural Sciences - Department <br />of Agriculture and Resource Economics web page. <br />Each fact sheet will contain the economic demo- <br />graphic of the basin, a description of agriculture in <br />the basin, the relative water supply and demand <br />amounts in the basin and the future direction of <br />our study. In addition, we'll be posting a fact <br />sheet about the analysis and the model we are <br />constructing. <br />Additional funding for this project is provided by <br />the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station. <br />Occurence and Fate of Organic Wastewater Contaminants in Onsite <br />Wastewater Systems and Implications for Water Quality Management <br />Kathleen DeJong, Environmental Science and Engineering Ph.D. Candidate <br />Colorado School of Mines <br />0 rganic wastewater contaminants (OWCs) such as pharmaceuticals and personal care products <br />have received increasing attention in the last decade due to their possible adverse effects on <br />ecosystems and human health. Several studies have identified wastewater as a primary contrib- <br />uting source of OWCs to the environment, but few have quantified their occurrence in onsite wastewater <br />treatment systems (OWS) and associated receiving environments. A substantial portion of the waste- <br />water generated in the U.S. is processed by OWS before discharge to the environment. For example, <br />in Colorado there are over 600,000 OWS in operation serving approximately 25% of the State's popula- <br />tion and 7,000 to 10,000 new systems are being installed each year. As a result, over 100 billion liters of <br />wastewater are being processed by OWS and then discharged to the environment every year in Colorado <br />alone. A research project was initiated by the Colorado School of Mines in collaboration with the U.S. <br />Geological Survey to determine the occurrence of OWCs in effluents produced from varying sources and <br />by different types of onsite wastewater systems, to <br />assess the fate and transport of OWCs in soil absorp -< <br />• 'f <br />�- •� iI i 4 E�. <br />lion systems prior to groundwater and surface water <br />recharge, and to assess the potential for OWCs to <br />!F- <br />impact receiving waters. <br />Thirty OWS, 10 groundwater wells, and 9 surface <br />waters in a Front Range region and Rocky Mountain <br />region of Colorado were selected and sampled for <br />conventional water and wastewater parameters and <br />for a suite of OWCs. The OWS sites represented <br />a range of sources: residential (single- family and <br />multi- family homes), commercial (restaurants, con- <br />venience stores, and retail centers), and institutional <br />(veterinary hospitals, schools, and churches). Ten <br />groundwater wells and 9 surface water sites were <br />selected to be representative of the sampling region <br />and samples were collected in conjunction with the <br />OWS sites. <br />Fellow CSM Ph.D. graduate student Jim McKinley <br />and DeJong sampling septic tank effluent <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.