Sewage is more than just filth. It’s evidence of our worst habits, everything from caffeine to cocaine, all ingested and flushed down the toilet. Now scientists are using wastewater to drug-test entire cities, and the results are sobering

Down to Business Environmental engineer Jörg Rieckermann, on the outskirts of San Diego, vacuums sewage from a manhole. John B. Carnett

Jörg Rieckermann snaps on a pair of purple rubber gloves, picks up a crowbar, and levers a manhole cover out of the way. “Here’s my access to the underworld,” Rieckermann, who speaks with a faint German accent, says as he hoists up a barrel-shaped robot suspended above a stream of raw sewage. Rieckermann’s protective gloves and orange jumpsuit are a sharp contrast to the parched brown backdrop of San Diego. But there’s no guarding against the stench. I can almost see the vapor, a rank blend of excrement and vomit that hits me like nuclear-strength smelling salts. If hell has a smell, it has found its way to this suburban portal, sandwiched between train tracks and a highway just outside the city limits.

Rieckermann seems unfazed. Moving with hunched urgency, the athletic 34-year-old pops open the top on the corrugated-plastic robot. The contraption uses a vacuum pump and a long hose to siphon samples from the sewage and then fill a carousel of plastic flasks with a mechanical arm. Apparently the battery has died, because half the flasks are empty. “At least it didn’t malfunction and overflow, like last time,” Rieckermann says, adjusting his rimless eyeglasses. He punches a keypad to recalibrate the draw. The robot beeps and gurgles and then spits up 100 millimeters of brown water. “Now, that’s a nice sample,” he says, holding up a plastic test tube full of sewage to the morning sun. “Liquid, plus particles—toilet paper, feces, sludge, slime.” Not to mention traces of cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, heroin and any number of other illicit substances ingested, digested, and then flushed down the toilet. This spiked refuse is why we’re here.

Rieckermann, a Swiss-trained environmental engineer, is one of a handful of scientists in the world pioneering a controversial new field known as sewer epidemiology, whose goal is to provide the first truly objective estimate of illegal-drug consumption. He’s now visiting San Diego State University on a research fellowship from the Swiss National Science Foundation to develop a mathematical model of community drug use based on the amount of illicit by-products that wind up in the sewers.

The approach is, in essence, a community drug test. By analyzing wastewater at treatment plants or at strategic spots throughout sewer systems, scientists can run extraordinarily accurate and anonymous tests on an entire population without ever asking anyone to hand over a cup of urine. (Everyone has to use the toilet, after all.) If, say, Philadelphia implements an ad campaign against methamphetamine, officials could gauge levels of the drug in the wastewater to instantly see if it’s working. Maybe San Francisco is considering building methadone clinics—does the data suggest they’re worth it? And if law enforcement wants to know whether drug busts are reducing consumption in certain neighborhoods, it could get an immediate answer.

Supporters say that wastewater testing provides objective data that links the hard science of chemical analysis and the social science of epidemiology. Conducting a urinalysis of an entire city, they argue, could be far less expensive and time-consuming than surveys, which can take up to a year to process. It would give officials the ability to study drug use in cities and towns in nearly real time.

What’s in a drop of sewage? What’s not? Find out in our photo gallery here. And for the down-and-dirty story behind the story from author Eric Hagerman, check out the first episode of our Cocktail Party Science podcast.


Page 1 of 7 1234567next ›last »
Want to learn more about breakthroughs in electronics, medicine, nanotech, and more?
Subscribe to Popular Science and enter to win $5,000!

11 Comments

daveyWavey

I just finished reading "The Ghost Map", a true epidemiology detective story to figure out what was causing cholera outbreaks in London during the mid-1800s. Turns out, it was a common well into which sewage had leaked.

We certainly live in a "global village" with stranger and more persistent disease.

Oh, please come to Fresno, CA. I can almost guarantee that this entire city is being "whacked out" on chemicals, which leaves them oblivious to what is taking place right under their noses.
Think I'm kidding? I wish I was.

This might be an interesting article, but I will never know. Instead of simply publishing the story and taking the advertising revenue, Popular Science has chosen to (as many other sites do) spread the article over several pages to artificially over-inflate their page views and advertisement impressions.

If you made it through this article, you are a stupid victim of an unimaginative advertising scheme.

Could they simplify it to one page, perhaps?

kardelen133 (not verified)

Hi All
I am a huge supporter of small wind, but I cannot think of many applicable situations for this design. This turbine seems to produce a pretty small amount of power for it's size and logistical concerns. A balloon holding up the other end of a string of turbines?? Good luck passing that through planning and zoning. I also believe that maintenence would be much more frequent with multiple turbines than some simpler designs. It's a cool idea, but before this guy spends much more time and money, he should pick up his guitar again.
saç ekimi saç ekimievden eve nakliyat evden eve nakliyat
thanks.

dontbother said "if you made it through this article, you are a stupid victim of an unimaginative advertising scheme."

Wow, ease up salty! This is no different than the ads on the pages of almost every published magazine, the commercials between segments of the news, or the billboards on the way to some far off destination. Stupid is being offended or surprised they're there. Stupid is also the advertiser that thinks anyone is paying attention to the ads in the first place. Stupid is hardly anybody that made it to page seven of the article and didn't feel victimized by Popular Science.

Hi All
I am a huge supporter of small wind, but I cannot think of many applicable situations for this design. This turbine seems to produce a pretty small amount of power for it's size and logistical concerns. A balloon holding up the other end of a string of turbines?? Good luck passing that through planning and zoning. I also believe that maintenence would be much more frequent with multiple turbines than some simpler designs. It's a cool idea, but before this guy spends much more time and money, he should pick up his guitar again.

ilahiler
kral oyun
islami sohbet
kraloyun

This turbine seems to produce a pretty small amount of power for it's size and logistical concerns. A balloon holding up the other end of a string of turbines??gazete okurüya gsmodelleri1 out of 2 people found this comment helpful

I admire people who work there need to .....

www.firmoo.com

I said here, referring to the sewer



Download Our iPhone App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed



Become a Fan On Facebook

Share links with friends, comment on stories and more


November 2009: Astronaut 3.0

Inside NASA's astronaut bootcamp and the grueling new training regimen for deep space. Plus, ten young geniuses shaking up science today, one writer's quest to analyze every man-made chemical in her body and more.

Check out the issue's full contents online here

Popular Science Photo Pool


Share your photos in the Pop Sci pool at www.flickr.com!
tags_sprite.png
POP_embeddedForm_cover_May09.jpg