On a brisk morning in early 2017, Paula Yockel power-washed the household’s propane tank at her house in rural Oklahoma, about 15 miles from downtown Oklahoma Metropolis. As she sprayed away thick layers of grime that had constructed up, the water bounced off the cylindrical tank, filling the air with a positive mist.
Inside 36 hours, she turned severely sick with abdomen ache, diarrhea and debilitating aches all through her physique.
After seeing a health care provider and getting bloodwork completed, Yockel acquired a name from the Oklahoma State Division of Well being: she had cryptosporidiosis, a doubtlessly lethal sickness often unfold by feces-contaminated water.
Her property, which she has since bought, was surrounded by farms that use biosolids — a kind of fertilizer created from handled human waste.
Yockel had moved to the property in 2004, alongside together with her husband and son. Through the years, all of them suffered from a spread of well being issues that worsened each time a contemporary batch of biosolids was unfold throughout close by fields.
Whereas she couldn’t definitively hyperlink all of her household’s illnesses to the fertilizer, she did collect sufficient proof to point out that biosolids more than likely brought on her cryptosporidiosis. (The disease-causing parasite was discovered on each the propane tank and the biosolid-treated fields close to her house.)
For greater than a decade, Yockel felt like a lone voice in Oklahoma, sounding the alarm concerning the risks of biosolids — solely to be dismissed by metropolis council members, state lawmakers, the Oklahoma Division of Environmental High quality, and even the Oklahoma Secretary of Agriculture, in line with Yockel. However lately, analysis has more and more proven that the black sludge can comprise heavy concentrations of chemical compounds linked to most cancers and start defects.
The findings have sparked lawsuits and led to bans on biosolid fertilizer in some components of the nation. In Oklahoma, a significant farm insurance coverage supplier not too long ago determined to exclude protection for biosolids-related damages.
Earlier this yr, the U.S. Environmental Safety Company acknowledged that biosolids containing excessive ranges of sure chemical compounds might pose dangers to human well being. The company additionally warned that ingesting groundwater from areas the place biosolids are utilized — frequent in lots of components of Oklahoma — can result in well being issues.
Regardless of the EPA’s warning, Oklahoma’s response has been to stall.
A invoice that will have banned using sewage fertilizer by 2027 was unexpectedly halted this month, regardless of acknowledgements from Oklahoma Metropolis that the apply is unsustainable. The state’s Division of Environmental High quality — charged with defending public well being and the surroundings — promotes the fabric as helpful and has pushed for authorized protections for cities, whereas the Division of Agriculture has taken little motion. In the meantime, farmers are left in limbo — uncertain whether or not their soil, water and livestock have been contaminated, with no steerage on defending their land or livelihood.
“Not solely are individuals not conscious that we do that throughout the nation, we’ve got no information of the power publicity,” Yockel stated. “We have been on 25 acres on the time, not realizing that proper throughout our fence, throughout the day whereas we have been at work, dozens — generally most likely lots of — of truckloads could be dumping sewage subsequent to our house.”
‘Defecating on the agricultural communities’
For Yockel, the stench of biosolids, which she describes as “horrendous” and “suffocating,” must be cause sufficient to ban their use. However for the EPA, it was the invention of excessive concentrations of PFAS — often known as “perpetually chemical compounds,” attributable to their persistence within the surroundings and human physique for many years and even longer — that led the company to acknowledge the fertilizer’s potential well being dangers. It has not but issued new rules.
PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are chemical compounds utilized in all the pieces from razors, firefighting foam, nonstick cookware, and clothes. Publicity to those chemical compounds has been linked to an elevated threat of prostate and kidney most cancers, developmental delays in youngsters, and elevated levels of cholesterol, amongst many different well being points.
Final yr, the EPA set official guidelines to restrict the quantity of PFAS chemical compounds allowed in public ingesting water.
However with regards to PFAS in biosolid fertilizer, used broadly by farmers throughout the nation, its regulation is at present left to the states. Some states have already moved to ban or limit its use, whereas others are ready for the EPA to take the lead.
In Oklahoma, advocates like Yockel had seen progress of their push to ban biosolids — till a current shift threatened these good points.
Senate Invoice 3, which sought to ban the land utility of sewage sludge by 2027, acquired a bipartisan vote of 42 to 4 within the Senate. Among the many few opposing it was Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa, who launched a separate invoice to defend cities and municipalities from biosolids-related lawsuits.
Throughout a committee listening to for Senate Invoice 3, Sen. Shane Jett, R-Shawnee, who has labored for years to limit the fertilizer, stated that cities have been “fairly frankly, defecating on the agricultural communities that we symbolize.”
Nonetheless, the momentum behind the invoice stalled within the Home, the place the chair of the agriculture committee, Rep. Kenton Patzkowski, R-Balko, declined to schedule a listening to.
“This is similar committee and committee chair that refused to listen to my biosolids invoice,” stated Rep. Jim Shaw, R-Chandler, who launched a special, extra aggressive measure to ban the fertilizer. “It’s my understanding the Oklahoma Municipal League as an entire lobbied closely to cease this laws from advancing.”
The Oklahoma Municipal League, a company that advocates for the pursuits of municipalities throughout the state, has publicly raised considerations about Senate Invoice 3, warning it is going to price municipalities tens of millions.
The group additionally has lobbyists registered to foyer the state legislature and the Oklahoma Division of Environmental High quality (ODEQ), the company that requested Rader’s invoice shielding cities from legal responsibility.
Oklahoma Metropolis struggles with disposal of 350 tons of sewage waste day by day
An investigation by Examine Midwest final yr discovered that greater than 80% of the state’s wastewater sludge finally ends up on crop fields. Round 40% of that sludge comes from Oklahoma Metropolis waste.
The town reviews that round 11,000 acres of agricultural land are permitted for the applying of biosolids from its 4 wastewater therapy vegetation. This contains 40 acres in Logan County, 5,000 acres in Lincoln County, and 6,000 acres in Oklahoma County.
These biosolids assist row crops for animal feed, in addition to Bermuda and native Oklahoma grasses used for grazing and sod farms.
The town faces a dilemma: what to do with the 350 tons of biosolids it produces day by day.
Since 1982, the land utility of biosolids has supplied an inexpensive resolution for the town to get rid of its waste.
Wastewater from bathrooms, sinks and industrial services flows to the town therapy vegetation, the place liquids and solids are separated. The solids are blended with lime to kill pathogens like Salmonella and Norovirus, then examined for heavy metals in accordance with state and federal rules. Inframark, the non-public firm that operates the town’s vegetation, has a contract with Synagro — an organization owned by Goldman Sachs — to move the biosolids to farmers, who obtain the fertilizer free of charge.
“To our information, there was no income obtained by Inframark for the correct disposal of biosolids,” stated Jasmine Morris, the general public data supervisor with the Oklahoma Metropolis Utilities Division.
For years, Oklahoma Metropolis promoted biosolids as a sustainable resolution. However not too long ago, officers acknowledged the long-term limitations of spreading handled waste on farmland.
“The Metropolis is conscious that land utility of biosolids is just not a long-term sustainable technique,” wrote Leigh Ann Kitsmiller, a regulatory compliance supervisor with Oklahoma Metropolis, in a report summarizing the town’s efforts associated to biosolids land utility and PFAS rules.
Anticipating the potential of a future ban — both by state laws or federal motion by the EPA — the town started exploring different disposal strategies a number of years in the past.
It’s at present contemplating three choices: anaerobic digestion, which makes use of micro organism to interrupt down waste; incineration; and landfill disposal, however solely together with one or each of the opposite strategies attributable to restricted house.
Implementing these adjustments will price greater than $100 million and 5 to 10 years to finish, the town estimates. It’s unclear how the town would pay for it.
Kenneth Ede, who served as director of the Environmental Science Graduate Program at Oklahoma State College, has authored quite a few articles on PFAS and directed and co-authored the primary PFAS sampling pointers for the state of Oklahoma.
Ede believes Oklahomans shouldn’t bear the price of the town’s plans; as a substitute, he argues, “the polluter ought to pay.” He stated that the first supply of PFAS is waste from industries, not from houses.
“Trade must be testing their effluent to find out their PFAS focus,” Ede stated, referring to the wastewater that comes from factories. “If the PFAS is elevated, the trade ought to examine which product they’re utilizing that’s excessive in PFAS.”
This yr, the town has instructed industries suspected of contributing to PFAS air pollution — reminiscent of industrial laundry, aerospace and metallic manufacturing — to self-monitor and take a look at for PFAS yearly.
The town additionally started its personal testing in July 2022. Nonetheless, officers say there’s not sufficient information but to pinpoint which industries are the first sources of PFAS contamination.
“Sampling of the OKC permitted industries has solely been accomplished on a handful of industries and has been accomplished solely as soon as,” stated Morris, from the Oklahoma Metropolis Utilities Division.
What the town has discovered to this point, nonetheless, does little to ease considerations. The common PFAS stage in biosolids unfold on Oklahoma farmland is considerably greater than what the EPA considers protected.
In a single pattern, the extent of PFAS was alarmingly excessive — over 48 components per billion (ppb). The EPA considers something above 1 ppb to pose potential dangers to human well being.
Provided that biosolids are used to develop grass and crops for animal consumption, Ede finds these outcomes “a bit disturbing.”
“If I put biosolids on soil, and I’m rising grass and I’ve dairy cows – that milk, I will be unable to promote it,” he stated.
Whereas the situation Ede describes hasn’t occurred in Oklahoma — a minimum of not but — it has performed out in different states. In Maine, farmers have been pressured to cease promoting milk and meat tainted with PFAS. In Michigan, a cattle farm was shut down after officers found PFAS in livestock, grain, and groundwater. And in Texas, farmers say the chemical compounds killed their animals.
Farmers face uncertainty as biosolids considerations set off native bans, insurance coverage shifts
Final month, Gov. Kevin Stitt posted a video on Fb proudly displaying off rows of freshly planted potatoes in his backyard.
The video was flooded with feedback referencing biosolids.
“I guess you don’t use biosolids, aka humanure aka biosludge, in your backyard. It’s best to assist prohibit its use on pastures when you’re not keen to apply it to your yard or backyard,” stated one of many feedback.
As farmers in different components of the nation file lawsuits over contamination of their farmland, Oklahomans in rural areas have gotten extra conscious of the difficulty. The city of Luther has banned biosolid fertilizer in response to native stress. Supporters of the ban additionally performed a key function in Rep. Jim Shaw’s upset victory final yr over a longtime incumbent who was a consumer of biosolids.
However many nonetheless have no idea that their livestock’s well being — and their very own — may very well be in danger.
In a 2023 doc, the EPA and the Nationwide Affiliation of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) — which represents state agriculture departments nationwide — agreed to work with state companies on the difficulty and provide “assist for farmers and ranchers to entry related federal and state help applications.” The difficulty was considered one of NASDA’s “2024 coverage priorities.”
Practically two years after the doc was signed, nonetheless, Oklahoma farmers and ranchers haven’t been given entry to any help applications or been knowledgeable concerning the potential risks of biosolids.
“Why haven’t a single farmer or rancher that I’ve talked to been notified that this was an issue?” says Saundra Traywick, a farmer who efficiently pushed for a ban on biosolids within the city of Luther. “Why haven’t they acquired a letter stating, ‘Hey, don’t take biosolids, since you would possibly contaminate your farm, your ranch, your water, your neighbor’s water, your beef, your produce’.”
Blayne Arthur, Oklahoma’s present Secretary of Agriculture and former president of NASDA (2023–2024), didn’t reply to a request for remark.
ODEQ, which regulates using sewage fertilizer, has targeted its efforts on testing PFAS in ingesting water slightly than in biosolids, because it awaits the EPA’s completion of its threat evaluation and the institution of rules.
“As biosolid land utility has change into a extra seen subject in Oklahoma, I’m sure extra work can be completed to find out its affect on public well being and the surroundings,” stated Erin Hatfield, director of communications for ODEQ.
However the company, tasked with defending Oklahoma’s air, land and water, has actively fought to guard cities. Final yr, the company’s director endorsed a invoice that will defend cities from lawsuits associated to biosolid fertilizer.
And when the city of Luther held a board assembly in 2020 to debate banning biosolids, ODEQ workers confirmed up together with Synagro representatives to defend the apply. “It’s well-documented to be appropriate for farmland,” stated company engineer Myles Mungle, in line with the Luther Register.
Insurance coverage firms are additionally paying consideration.
Oklahoma Farm Bureau Insurance coverage not too long ago notified clients that it’ll not cowl damages associated to animal and human waste.
Beforehand, the coverage excluded protection for bodily damage or property harm brought on by issues like smoke, acids or poisonous chemical compounds. Now, the insurance coverage firm has added “biosolids” and “supplies generated by wastewater, animal waste, or human waste therapy” to that record of exclusions.
Oklahoma Farm Bureau Insurance coverage is a subsidiary of the Oklahoma Farm Bureau. Whereas the Oklahoma Farm Bureau focuses on advocacy, coverage improvement and member providers for agriculture, its insurance coverage department operates as a separate enterprise entity.
Gary Buckner, the chief vice chairman and normal supervisor of Oklahoma Farm Bureau Insurance coverage, stated in a press release that the current change in protection “ensures the monetary viability of Oklahoma Farm Bureau Insurance coverage.”
Farm Bureau Insurance coverage is the one insurance coverage supplier in Oklahoma to implement such a protection change, in line with Glen Mulready, who heads the Oklahoma Insurance coverage Division, the company tasked with regulating the state’s insurance coverage trade.
Robert Bierschenk, a farmer and former president of the Oklahoma County Farm Bureau, believes that the change unfairly shifts duty from the Bureau to the farmers.
Bierschenk was among the many first Oklahoma farmers to talk out in opposition to biosolids, elevating considerations about pathogens and poisonous metals polluting groundwater in 2016, nicely earlier than PFAS entered the dialog.
He stated his considerations have been largely dismissed by the Bureau’s board members. “The state workplace has by no means tried to assist us do away with the stuff,” Bierschenk stated. “I assume as a result of they don’t wish to step within the farmers’ enterprise.”
He described an analogous lack of engagement from Arthur, the Oklahoma Secretary of Agriculture, whom he invited to talk with the Oklahoma County Farm Bureau final yr. In accordance with Bierschenk, she by no means responded.
Analysis explores hemp to fight PFAS air pollution, whereas advocates name for federal ban
As Oklahoma and different states look ahead to the EPA to take motion, some are in search of options.
At Penn State College, Heather Preisendanz, director of the Institute for Sustainable Agricultural, Meals, and Environmental Science, is main a research to guage whether or not hemp may very well be used to soak up PFAS from contaminated soil.
“There’s been some proof that hemp is de facto good at taking over heavy metals,” Preisendanz stated. “The (Pennsylvania Division of Agriculture) was actually curious if that may be one other advantage of rising hemp on a contaminated website: may it additionally take up PFAS?”
The analysis continues to be in its early phases, with preliminary findings anticipated subsequent yr. Whereas Preisendanz acknowledges the dangers of utilizing biosolids as fertilizer, she doesn’t assist an outright ban.
“I don’t need us to not have entry to biosolids as a nutrient supply, as a result of it’s such a worthwhile, helpful reuse of these supplies,” she stated. “I don’t need us to be sending the entire nation’s biosolids to landfills or burning them. I don’t suppose that’s the proper resolution.”
As an alternative, she advocates for a threshold strategy with totally different pointers for various ranges of PFAS.
For Yockel, nonetheless, a federal ban is the one reply, since PFAS is only one of many issues with biosolids — as she skilled firsthand whereas dwelling in rural Oklahoma.
Yockel and her husband ultimately bought their property and moved to an space away from farms handled with the sludge. Shortly after the transfer, a lot of their well being issues started to vanish, together with her respiratory infections, her husband’s pores and skin rashes, and her son’s power throat infections.
After spending 1000’s of {dollars} on testing and analysis, Yockel based the nonprofit Mission 503 to share her findings and lift consciousness. The group’s web site contains biosolids pattern outcomes, a map of utility websites in Oklahoma, and a number of scientific research that define the dangers linked to the fertilizer.
Yockel believes the aim ought to principally be to do away with biosolids. She imagines a system the place, as a substitute of sending the waste to farms or landfills, vehicles would take it to new therapy vegetation. There, it may very well be studied, a few of it presumably reused — for instance, changed into vitality — and the remainder safely destroyed.
“We’d like one other tier of nationwide infrastructure,” she stated. “We are able to harvest one thing which may be usable, however the remainder of it will get destroyed. The know-how is partially there, however it may be there if it’s a precedence. We have now to provide individuals a shred of hope that there’s a totally different manner of coping with this.”
Republish our articles free of charge, on-line or in print.
