Chef Alice Waters, who built her career on serving good, organic, locally grown food, now supports fertilizing Bay Area gardens with municipal sewage sludge.
News » August 20, 2010
Alice Waters’ Chez Sludge
The world-famous advocate of local, organic food now advocates controversial “organic biosolids compost” for gardens.
Celebrity chef Alice Waters is the world’s most famous advocate of growing and eating local, organic food. In February 2010, Waters’ Chez Panisse Foundation chose as its new executive director “green socialite” and liberal political activist Francesca Vietor. But Vietor’s hiring created a conflict of interest that has married Waters and her foundation to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and its scam of disposing of toxic sewage as free “organic biosolids compost” for gardens.
San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom appointed Vietor as one of the five SFPUC commissioners in 2008, just a year after the commission began giving away sewage from San Francisco and eight other counties as “organic biosolids compost.”
In early 2010, John Mayer, then with the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), began organizing environmental, gardening and food safety groups to endorse a letter to Newsom opposing the sludge-to-gardens giveaway.
In February, Mayer sent Vietor an e-mail at the Chez Panisse Foundation, including the sign-on letter calling for a permanent ban on the sludge-to-gardens giveaway. Mayer did not know that Vietor was on the SFPUC board and that she was and is its vice president. Nor did Vietor mention this to him when she declined to add the Chez Panisse Foundation to the protest letter. Wearing her hat as head of the foundation, she wrote back to Mayer, “Thank you for your note and the good work of the Organic Consumers Association. We do not generally sign on to letters so cannot offer you support at this time.”
On March 3, CBS TV affiliate KPIX in San Francisco reported that testing of San Francisco’s “organic Biosolids compost” found toxic contaminants, including dioxins. The next day the toxic sludge giveaway was placed on temporary hold, where it remains today.
On March 7, author and food writer Jill Richardson broke the news of Vietor’s dual and conflicting professional capacities on her blog. Seemingly now aware of the conflict of interest in which she had put herself, Vietor sought advice from SFPUC General Manager Ed Harrington, writing “this is getting sticky. lets talk in a.m. [sic]”
On March 23, the OCA hand-delivered a letter to Waters, asking her “to unequivocally and publicly state that sewage sludge is unacceptable for farming and gardening–organic or conventional.”
One week later, Waters publicly responded to the OCA letter. But an open records request revealed that Vietor had emailed Harrington a draft of Waters’ response, asking him to review it. Harrington responded, “Sounds perfect to me. Let me run it by a couple of folks in case I’m missing something and get back to you quickly.”
Waters’ SFPUC-vetted response read, in part: “I look forward to reviewing the science and working with the SFPUC to ensure the safety of composting methods. I support Francesca Vietor, Executive Director of the Chez Panisse Foundation and a PUC commissioner, whose environmental work I have admired for many years and whose integrity has been questioned.”
The merging of the sludge dumpers at the SFPUC and the organic garden purists at Chez Panisse Foundation is now complete. Waters has been made into a sewage sludge industry shill, its latest PR conquest and perhaps its greatest victory in a decades-long effort to greenwash hazardous waste as “organic biosolids compost.”
ABOUT THIS AUTHOR
John Stauber is the founder and executive director of the nonprofit Center for Media and Democracy in Madison, Wisconsin. He is the co-author with Sheldon Rampton of Weapons of Mass Deception: The Uses of Propaganda in Bush’s War on Iraq (2003) and Mad Cow USA (1997).

SAVE 53% OFF
Reader Comments
Recycling human waste is absolutely essential. We cannot indefinitely continue to flush chemical elements into the oceans/landfills, while mining potash and phosphate deposits (that took thousands of years to accumulate). How many jobs would be created if we dug up the streets and separated industrial and household waste sources?
Chemical elements are created in stars, we cannot create them here on earth. Dioxins, on the other hand do eventually biodegrade when exposed to air/water/microbes (not so much in landfills). I’m pretty sure that plants don’t absorb them. The same can be said for PCB’s: if they aren’t directly eaten by animals, they don’t enter the food chain. Some plants do absorb and concentrate toxic elements (eg tobacco/cadmium), and they are even used for bioremediation. So stop smoking!
And if you separate the industrial waste and regulate what is sold to “consumers”, then household waste should not contain any chemical elements that would accumulate.
We cannot make chemical elements, they do not biologically degrade—ever. That’s why laws like RCRA, that regulate mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium, are so important.
Posted by Bill Leonard on Sep 12, 2010 at 6:38 AM
I would like to temper my last post. The earthworms would eat the sludge and the birds that eat them would bio-concentrate the PCB’s and dioxins.
Also, I would like to point out other sources of waste/fertilizer from chicken/cow/pig processing plants that actually treat feathers/entrails as waste. These point sources also dump huge amounts of nutrients into rivers and create “dead zones” in the oceans.
I once managed a small commercial analytical lab (KY) that tested effluent and I can tell you that many companies with discharge permits will shop around to find labs that give them the answers that they want. Once, a state employee let them use an inappropriate test (test for A instead of B).
There are so many ways to get around the law:
1) they have advance warning that their waste will be sampled on a given day
2) the government relies on companies to tell them what toxins to test for
The only solution is to have unannounced sampling visits by people (government) that have no financial incentive to lie. Then, the sample has to be given an anonymous ID (double-blind), sent to a commercial lab along with spiked samples (to check for lab bias), the results can then be reassembled with the ID by government employees, and reported back to the company and EPA.
Posted by Bill Leonard on Sep 12, 2010 at 7:29 AM
Posting Security