[fsf60k] Re: Solution/good news
- From: "Michael AR Cipoletti" <ikecip@xxxxxxx>
- To: "'George Pardo'" <pardo123@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Peter White'" <pedro831@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 21:12:37 -0400
Dr. Aragon-
As I had stated when I saw you last night. The state of the water in Nuevo
Amanecer is dire. ENCAL is reporting levels of arsenic at 40+ parts per
billion similar to the results that CISTA obtained a couple months back. We
are in the process of trying to purchase a solar pump to distribute water
but based on this information we have been told that MINSA will close the
well as it is not suitable for human consumption. You mentioned the
possibility that one of your colleagues has knowledge/experience with an
arsenic filtration system and any information you can provide us with in
this regard would be appreciated.
Talk soon,
Michael
From: George Pardo [mailto:pardo123@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 12:13 AM
To: Peter White
Cc: Michael AR Cipoletti; richard wiltamuth; billcpf@xxxxxxx;
lisapflanagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; fsf60k@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; skornblatt@xxxxxxxxx;
kelleystanford@xxxxxxxxx; abbyfl57@xxxxxxxxx; tlog0201@xxxxxxxxx;
clubgomes@xxxxxxx; jzima28@xxxxxxx; nycus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Solution/good news
Pedro,
Although the water from the existing well can be used for irrigation, at
this point in time, I don't think the Nuevos will be willing to invest the
money to irrigate. In their situation, I probably would not have the vision
to act any different. The other issue, to contend with, in trying to use
the exisitng well, is the local authority that has closed it down. I feel
it may be quite difficult to prove to them that the water is being
exclusively used correctly. In the long run, if we help them establish the
use of the Steven's filter or another filter it would probably be a positve
thing, but considering that we have the heat issue which demands expensive
equipment and the filtering issue, it makes the existing well not
economically attractive if there is another option. We need to compare the
numbers between the 2 options and see what makes sense from an economic
point of view and also from a scheduling point of view. I am sure we all
agree that we would pay a little more if we could resolve the water issue
sooner than later, although on the surface what Mike is working on has the
potentional of being less expensive than further developing the existing
well.
You and Mike hopefully will be able to determine the quality of the proposed
well as well as the quantity available per day. It may be a wise investment
to buy some sort of gps. If you can provide me the distance and height
differnece between the proposed location of the well and the NA tanks, I
will track someone down to design the system including size of tanks, tower
heights and pipe sizes. The design may be reinterpreted locally but at
least we will have a better chance of success, and not work by trial and
error, as has occurred in the past, as a result of circumstance and time
issues.
Have a great trip and I hope you much success.
Ciao,
Jorge
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Peter White <pedro831@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hola George. I will be with Mike for the next few days, and this NA water
problem will be one of our major tasks. Bill spoke of making sure of the
"replenishment" factor in any new water area. We're not buying anything
until all facts have been found and all agree that it is the next best step.
I still think there must be some utility for the present well in NA, even
with 40ppb. I don't know how they tested the well to get that count, did
they purge the well like we had done when we got a reading of 12ppb last
year or two years ago? I don't know. Also, the water with the 40ppb, if it
is that, can still be used for crops and bathing and maybe even animals,
just not human consumption. Maybe a smaller generator, not the big $4000
Pedro Lopez generator that Monica and Glen bought in July 07, might get the
water up for local use by biointensive gardens, other fields, and other
uses. And maybe the new site can provide the drinking water. We'll get all
the facts we can and return with hopefully plenty of info before any money
is put forth. Please ask any questions or make any comments over the next
few days to Mikes email so we can use them while there. I'll be returning on
Monday July 27. Lisa and Mike will be returning that day also. Lisa left
today for Nica, I leave tomorrow. PW
-----Original Message-----
From: George Pardo [mailto:pardo123@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 12:29 AM
To: Michael AR Cipoletti
Cc: richard wiltamuth; Peter White; billcpf@xxxxxxx;
lisapflanagan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; fsf60k@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; skornblatt@xxxxxxxxx;
kelleystanford@xxxxxxxxx; abbyfl57@xxxxxxxxx; tlog0201@xxxxxxxxx;
clubgomes@xxxxxxx; jzima28@xxxxxxx; nycus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Solution/good news
are you referring the existing well? Maybe a test can be done to determine
what is the max gallons per day that it can sustain. that is what we did
with the other well. We should really do this before we buy a parcel of
land. don't know if you were already panning to do this but a reminder,
just in case.
Ciao,
Jorge
On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Michael AR Cipoletti <ikecip@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
Well has a depth of 220 feet (approx)
mc
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:22 PM, richard wiltamuth <dwiltam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
the well in cortizal seems to offer many advantages---less or no arsenic,
cooler, cheaper equipment and promise of longer equipment lifespan. what is
depth of water? is this the well with the wheel where we drew water for
nuevo a few years ago? would need to have the water tested several times to
make sure of arsenic and other potential contaminants. would need the
government to test and approve the water before we sink money into this
project. if this source is technically feasible, given the longer distance
the water has to travel, would be a good solution. maybe we could buy the
rights to pump a certain quantity of water rather than buying the land where
the well is located. easements would have to be arranged for the pipes.
am concerned about the nuevo community's ability to use the arsenic filters
as intended, given their track record with the diesel generator and lack of
literacy. the less equipment involved, the less that can go wrong.
mike, thanks for your tireless work on this; am glad you're on the scene
like an agua machine. you and the others will make a solution happen much
faster.
dick w.
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Michael AR Cipoletti <ikecip@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
I met with Salvador Mora the gentleman from ENICAL that informed us of the
issue. I also spoke with several folks from the public health center in UNAN
LEon.. There seems to be a trend of rising arsenic levels in this watertable
due to a variety of factors. They forsee the problem worsening over time..
There is however a good potential solution. In the community of Cortizal
located about 1000 meters from the location of the existing well with clean
cool water. The temperature of the water is under 80 degrees and has tested
clean for several years. Salvador conchita Marco and a couple of the
students will be driving to nuevo tomorrow morning to assess the
possibilities of the location and look into the land/ownership/selling
price..
This site if viable would enable us to use the solar pump we originally were
going to purchase (half the price/easier to obtain) and could potentially
benefit more people....
Salvador also said there is the possibilty of an electric generator being
wired in or a standard generator with a solar invertor to pump the water.
Additionally the existing tubing tanks seem as if they would still work all
we would need to do is connect the tanks to the new water source.
I am happy with todays findings and the students and I will be making this
task a priority over the coming week.
I will send an update tomorrow afternoon. Wish us luck.
Michael
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 16, 2009, at 11:03 PM, George Pardo <pardo123@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Very bad news indeed.
As far as the arsenic is concerned, it can be taken out of the water. We
can get the materials from Dr. Meng to put together the filters, probably
for about $30 each. The chemicals I recall to be about $4-5$ per year.
This is a viable option if we trust the people to operate the filters
properly. They do already use a filter for bacteria. I also looked at a
point of distribution filter that would be put by the well but that source
is not yet totally available, although could be developed for the future.
The Dr. Meng (Steven's) filter is a sure thing. We could demonstrate the
filter to MINSA and get approval to open the well.
The water, even with 40ppb arsenic, is still suitable for bathing and
irrigation if it is not poured on the part of th plant that you eat and not
rinsed. If you irrigate at the roots no problem. Something like lettuce or
cabbage could be a problem if not watered properly. Corn would be no
problem because it is covered by the husk.
Pete I don't think the crushing of the rock has anything to do with the
arsenic just the depth of the well. The deeper wells are more likely to
have arsenic.
According to Dr. Meng there is no way to predict where there will be clean
water in a region where there is arsenic. You can have well with 900ppb and
30' away have a well that is acceptable. Drilling is trial and error. The
only way to be sure to get clean water is to drill where there is already a
good well. One option is to drill in a remote location that is known to be
good and pipe the water to NA. This will invlove additional costs and
additional complexity. This was suggested by the organization that did the
water project in Chac.
The main problem with drilling is the cost of drillling through rock. If
there is an area in NA, perhaps in the 20's where there is no rock, it would
be worth the chance to drill several wells to in order to find a clean one.
Maybe the water there may not be as hot.
The question in my mind would be, do we want to deal with the arsenic and
temperature of the water in NA or is it best to pipe the water in from
somewhere else where the temperature is moderate, letting us use cheaper
pumps, and without arsenic. The trade off would probably a high tower tower
and a larger tank and the possibly a couple of miles of pipe and negotiating
the rights to lay that pipe, possibly through public and private land.
I think I would try to drill in the 20's at least 1 well and test the
temperature of the water and arsenic. If there is a lower temperature that
would enable us to use a cheaper pumping system and we could use the
Steven's filter for the aresenic. If we hit rock I would abandon that well
and perhaps look into piping the water in from a remote location.
Mike and Pete hopefully you can gather some data on the ground in Nica that
can be used to develop a good direction. Good luck at the very least.
Please comment on the above options. Thanks.
George
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Peter White <pedro831@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hola. Brace yourselves for sure. Mike arrived in Nica late yesterday to the
news that the Nica govt. org., Minsa?, tested the water in NA and found it
to be 40 ppb arsenic, too high considering the nat'l standard is now 10 ppb.
They suggested closing the well. We have spent a lot of time on this
project, including two years ago educating ourselves about arenic from Dr.
Meng from the STevens Instit. of Tech. in Hoboken, NJ, who believes and has
proven that arsenic can be removed cheaply, safely, etc. However this may be
of no value if the Nica govt orders the well closed. The other bad news is
that the two year old diesel motor is unable to be repaired. So the people
are without water and walking for water I suppose. Mike is going to be
asking a multitude of questions of the MINSA people and others, and putting
his head together with Conchita, Martin, and others about what the next
step/s are. Please think about this and get your questions to Mike or me
asap. I am going down to Nica for a quick five day visit July 23-27. This
was supposed to be a joyous visit in part, as we were going to see the
contract for the installation of the solar water project in NA and put up
half the money in order to get the project going. Now we are really set
back. The real problem is the continued suffering of the people.
The good news I suppose is that we aren't going to be throwing more money
into the old generator if it is kaput. Also we are not going to spend $25000
on a solar project for a well that may be of no use anymore. Mike says that
there is a clean water source about 2K from NA, which we know about (I
think). I beleive it is where the bomba de mescate is located. That's where
the people walk to when there is no water. It is a hand/rope pump that is
cumbersome, tiresome, slow, etc. but it has clean water. Or, maybe it isn't
clean and no one ever tested there??? Frankly, a good portion of Nica is
with bad water, so what are we to do? I dont' see how La UNion, only 1K
away, has good water (or maybe it isn't either) and NA is bad. We need
everyone to think, suggest, provide ideas, etc. so we can move forward
somehow.
I remember Dr. Meng saying that the arsenic isn't really in the deep water
naturally but that arsenic is released from the crushing of the rock when
deep wells, where water lies below a level of rock, are perforated. In NA,
the first 40 feet or so was dirt. Then they hit rock which was 60 - 65 feet.
The rate of descent was slow, the big drill bit broke a few times, but
finally the driller struck the water they've been using since Aug. 07.
Problem probably is that the arsenic gets into the water from the crushing
of the rock I guess. I'm not the expert here, but I just hope they can
locate a place where we can begin anew, cheaply, with good water and then
solarize it from the outset. Be well. Pray. PW
=
=
Other related posts:
