title: "On the Seemingly Unresolvable Topic of Groundwater Pollution" slug: "fanchunping-groundwater-pollution-2016.en" date: "2016-04-15" category: "ecology" author: "Fan Chunping" excerpt: "A Ministry of Water Resources monthly report showed that over 80% of shallow groundwater is undrinkable. Yet officials and media explained it away: 'The non-compliant water is shallow groundwater, not drinking water sources.' When will we truly face our environmental problems?"

On the Seemingly Unresolvable Topic of Groundwater Pollution

Author: Fan Chunping (Senior Editor, Academic Journal Office, Beijing Institute of Technology)

Recently, two pieces of news have left me deeply dispirited.

The first is the Ministry of Water Resources' January 2016 Groundwater Dynamics Monthly Report, which states: "In 2015, 2,103 groundwater wells distributed across the Songliao Plain, Huang-Huai-Hai Plain, basins and plains of Shanxi and northwestern regions, and the Jianghan Plain were monitored. Overall water quality assessment results were poor: there was zero Class I water; Class II–III water accounted for 19.9% of the total; Class IV water accounted for 32.9%; and Class V water accounted for 47.2%."

In other words, in the areas mentioned above, over 80% of groundwater is undrinkable—not even fit for human contact.

The second is a Beijing Times article from April 12 titled "Report of 80% Groundwater Failing Standards Is a Misreading." The article claims that the Monthly Report's "80% failing standards" refers to shallow groundwater, that shallow groundwater is not a drinking water source, that deep water sources are fine, and that urban drinking water source areas are not affected.

In truth, this explanation is even more misleading.

Never mind that surface water and shallow groundwater have traditionally been sources of drinking water. According to the Beijing Times article's own logic, the majority of the 2,103 monitored groundwater wells are located in rural areas—and rural areas have no water treatment plants. This water is, in fact, the rural population's drinking water source right now. Moreover, it is precisely shallow groundwater that sustains plant growth and the needs of animals.

Let us grant, for the sake of argument, that urban residents' drinking water can be made safe through disinfection and purification. What about rural areas? What about livestock and poultry? What about vegetables and grain? Is rural drinking water not worth caring about? Do urban dwellers not eat vegetables, meat, or grain?

The same report also states: "Among 4,748 urban drinking water source areas surveyed, 1,817 are groundwater drinking water sources, with a compliance rate of approximately 85%."

Is this not absurd? Not a single shallow groundwater source achieves Class I; Class II–III accounts for only 19.9%; Class IV and V exceed 80%. Meanwhile, the reported compliance rate for deep groundwater sources nationwide is about 85%—meaning about 15% fail to meet standards. Even this 15% non-compliance is an already terrifying figure.

And this 15% is an increasing number, a seed of contamination that will spread underground.

These issues only appear unresolvable. In truth, they are very clear. My dismay has two sources: first, the realization that the groundwater quality problem is so severe; second, the self-deceiving explanations from officials and media, and the psychological self-comfort exhibited by enthusiastic netizens who eagerly share such explanations as though the very act of having received an explanation resolves the problem.

Water pollution involves an enormously complex system of social production, organization, and management. Even if the entire society were to face the problem squarely with a strong sense of crisis and actively pursue remediation, conditions this severe would still take decades—or, for deep groundwater, potentially millennia—to improve. Yet when officials, media, and netizens join in a chorus of self-comfort, when will our environment ever get better?

Profoundly disheartened.