This year, Danville water users are off the hook
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
By Sarah Arkin
Published: August 19, 2008
The rising cost of chemicals used in water treatment is resulting in higher water bills in some localities across the region, but Danville residents are off the hook this fiscal year.
“In the current budget we should have it covered,” according to water plant manager Barry Dunkley.
The added fuel costs in transporting chemicals is placing a higher price tag on all chemicals.
However, the increase in some chemicals goes beyond transportation costs.
Florosilic acid — or fluoride — is one chemical with a larger price increase. It’s a chemical added to prevent tooth decay. “It’s one we could do without, but don’t do without,” said Dunkley.
Aluminum sulfate, a main treatment chemical that helps remove particulate matter from water, has increased in price between 10 and 20 percent. Sodium hydroxide, another important ingredient used for pH adjustment, has similarly risen in price.
It’s mostly just basic supply and demand that’s driving chemicals up, Dunkley said.
Sodium hydroxide, for example, is a byproduct of fertilizers. When farmers and others need it for fertilizer, it’s in short supply for water treatment. With that particular chemical, he said, Danville is lucky because they can use lime.
Treatment costs also depend on the weather. In a particularly rainy year, treatment will be more expensive. The dry weather this year has been good in terms of budget.
Dunkley said possible changes in the price of chemicals are considered when developing the annual budget. Vendors, he said, will also let them know if they expect increases, but they can’t predict the market either.
“Because of the uncertainty of the (price of) chemicals, we try to include enough buffer,” he said.
• Contact Sarah Arkin at (434) 791-7983 or
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( nyscof ) on August 20, 2008 at 8:29 am
Dentists are fluoride misinformed
A study by Yoder concluded, “The majority of dental professionals surveyed were unaware of the current understanding of fluoride’s predominant posteruptive mode of action.“
The Centers for Disease Control reports that fluoride’s benefits are topical not systemic meaning no need to swallow fluoride in the first place.
Also, after all these years, they have discovered that fluoride levels in tooth enamel are not inversely related to cavities as was once thought.
Fluoridation is based on out-dated science not valid by today’s standars.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( LindaRosaRN ) on August 19, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Dunkley is reported saying about fluorosilic acid (fluoride): “It�s one we could do without, but don�t do without.“
Thank goodness you don’t do without! The adjustment of this naturally occurring mineral to its ideal level saves the community much more in dental costs. On average, community water fluoridation eliminates one cavity per per person every three years. In other words, that’s one-third of the community that doesn’t need to go have a cavity worked on every year. The savings are huge! To say nothing about the savings in pain and replacement fillings/caps later in life.
By the way, about that petition with the 2,000 “professionals.“ I took a look at that list. They aren’t your mainstream medical/dental professionals. If you have questions about fluoridation, ask your dentist.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( nyscof ) on August 19, 2008 at 6:29 am
About 2,000 professionals signed a statement urging Congress to stop water fluoridation until Congressional hearings are conducted. They cite new scientific evidence that fluoridation, long promoted to fight tooth decay, is ineffective and has serious health risks. See statement: http://www.fluorideaction.org/statement.august.2007.html
Please join them at
http://congress.FluorideAction.Net
Report Inappropriate Comment