Report on Iowa’s Water Quality Crisis and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Challenge to Clean Water and Public Health

The state of Iowa is currently facing a significant water quality crisis, primarily characterized by toxic nitrate contamination in its drinking water sources. This situation presents a direct challenge to the achievement of several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most notably SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being). The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is conducting a triannual review of state water quality standards, providing a critical opportunity to address these systemic failures and align state policy with global sustainability targets.

Primary Contaminants and Public Health Impacts: A Failure of SDG 3

The persistent contamination of Iowa’s water directly undermines the core principles of SDG 3, which aims to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. The primary pollutants of concern have severe public health implications.

Nitrate Contamination

• Nitrate levels in Iowa’s drinking water frequently exceed the federal safety threshold of 10mg/L.
• Emerging scientific evidence indicates that nitrate exposure may be toxic even at levels below the current federal standard.
• Documented health outcomes linked to nitrate-contaminated water, which contravene SDG 3, include:
  1. Various forms of cancer
  2. Birth defects

Other Pollutants of Concern

• Phosphorus and E. coli: These contaminants contribute to unsafe recreational water conditions and beach closures.
• PFAS: Carcinogenic “forever chemicals” pose a long-term threat to public health.

Source of Pollution: Unsustainable Production and SDG 12

The Role of Industrial Agriculture

The report identifies industrial agriculture as the principal source of water contamination in Iowa. This points to a systemic failure in achieving SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), which calls for the environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.

• A report commissioned by Polk County concluded that industrial agriculture, including factory farms, is responsible for 80% of the nitrates found in the Raccoon and Des Moines rivers.
• This unsustainable production model externalizes environmental and health costs onto the public, directly conflicting with the objectives of SDG 12.

Systemic Failures in Water Management: A Violation of SDG 6

The ongoing crisis demonstrates a failure to meet the targets of SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), specifically Target 6.1, which calls for universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water.

Case Studies

• Central Iowa Rivers: During the summer, nitrate levels in the Raccoon and Des Moines rivers, which supply drinking water to urban centers, surpassed the federal safety threshold for a total of 33 days.
• Northeast Iowa: The sensitive driftless area has suffered from decades of nitrate exposure above the 10mg/L limit, prompting 13 environmental groups to petition the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for emergency action.

Institutional Response and Governance: An Obstacle to SDG 16

State and Federal Oversight

The response from regulatory bodies raises concerns regarding SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), which emphasizes the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions. The current regulatory framework appears inadequate for protecting vital public resources.

• Iowa DNR: The ongoing review of water quality standards presents an opportunity for the DNR to strengthen regulations and safeguard public health, as advocated by groups like Food & Water Watch.
• U.S. EPA: In a concerning development, the EPA has rescinded its “impaired waters” designation for major Iowa rivers, including segments of the Cedar, Des Moines, and Raccoon rivers. This action was taken despite the agency’s own findings that these waterways were acutely contaminated with nitrates in excess of federal safety thresholds, undermining institutional accountability.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article on Iowa’s water crisis highlights issues that are directly connected to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being – The article explicitly links contaminated drinking water to negative health outcomes.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation – The core theme of the article is the contamination of drinking water sources and the need for improved water quality standards.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production – The article identifies industrial agriculture as the primary source of the water pollution, pointing to unsustainable production practices.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
  
  Explanation: The article directly addresses this target by discussing the health risks associated with nitrate-contaminated water, such as “birth defects and cancers.” It highlights the danger to residents, stating, “No one should have to wonder whether the water they drink will give them cancer.”

SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation

• Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
  
  Explanation: This target is central to the article. The text focuses on the “toxic nitrate contamination” of Iowa’s drinking water and mentions other pollutants like “phosphorus and E. coli” and “carcinogenic forever chemicals known as PFAS.” The call for the Iowa DNR to strengthen safety standards is a direct effort to achieve this target.

SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

• Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
  
  Explanation: The article identifies “industrial agriculture” as the source of 80% of the nitrates in the Raccoon and Des Moines rivers. This points to a failure in managing agricultural chemical runoff (a waste product of this production system), directly impacting human health and the environment, which is the focus of Target 12.4.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions and implies several indicators that can be used to measure progress:

Indicators for SDG 3 Targets

• Indicator for Target 3.9: (Implied) Incidence of water-borne illnesses.
  
  Explanation: While the article does not provide statistics, it establishes a direct link between nitrate exposure and “birth defects and cancers.” Tracking the rates of these specific health outcomes in affected populations would serve as an indicator of progress in reducing illnesses from water contamination.

Indicators for SDG 6 Targets

• Indicator for Target 6.3: (Mentioned) Concentration of pollutants in water bodies.
  
  Explanation: The article provides a specific, measurable indicator: the nitrate concentration level. It references the “federal safety threshold of 10mg/L” and notes that levels in the Raccoon and Des Moines rivers were “in excess of the federal nitrate safety threshold for 33 days.” The presence of phosphorus, E. coli, and PFAS are also mentioned as measurable indicators of water quality. This directly relates to the official indicator 6.3.2: “Proportion of bodies of water with good ambient water quality.”

Indicators for SDG 12 Targets

• Indicator for Target 12.4: (Mentioned) Proportion of pollution from specific sources.
  
  Explanation: The article provides a clear data point that can be used as an indicator: “A recent report commissioned by Polk County found that 80% of the rivers’ nitrates stem from industrial agriculture.” Measuring and reducing this percentage would indicate progress towards achieving environmentally sound management of chemicals from this production sector.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foodandwaterwatch.org