Potential Disaster Looming: Stop the pumps in New Orleans Now!

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Most of you know how little stock I put in some the enviro-psuedo science but this is one point I can agree on. I have long stated that water and soil contamination needs to move to the forefront of concerns over "global warming" and "preserving forests". This contaminated water should not be pumped into the ocean along the gulf coast because of the amount of use by humans as well and marine life. Over time, the ocean will filter and clean the water but at what cost? This is a way of spreading who knows what desease all down the coastline. I agree with total evacuation and gradual decontamination no matter how bad Trump wants in there to develop.




posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Just discovered this site last night as a link from another forum, so hope my post shows up in the right place and that it is understood.

My son has worked for a private environmental cleanup company in the midwest for over a year. Regarding the pumping, he is concerned. He told me last night that "water is its own containment". Therefore, all this pumping is disbursing the contaminents/toxicity into the air...then what?

Yes, it should be stopped immediately.



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 01:07 PM
link   
So what do we do?

Protest? Petition? "send a letter to your senator"?!?

The federal governement is making decisions that reasonable and knowledgeable folks deem disasterous. Is this type of thing where civil war comes in? Jihad attacks on the pumps?

Sri Oracle

(note I didn't say any of the above... someone has hijacked my computer! I swear
)



posted on Sep, 11 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
Just heard on MSNBC's Keith Obberman that there is now discussion among the Army Corp of Engineers (for the reasons discussed in this thread) to NOT empty the city of all the flood water. They are now considering what other options they might have to specifically address the toxins in the water....

Trying to confirm...

[edit on 11-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Well, they certainly need to stop and think about how much crap they are pumping into open water sources. Hows about a settling pond or at least a bucket of gravel or two to filter the big pieces out? I mean, anything is better than nothing at all.

Here in Ky they pump water out of mines but its required to flow into settling ponds which allow the silt and heavy metals to settle to the bottom before the water leaves on the other end. It also passes though a series of gabbion baskets which are wire baskest filled with large aggregate. Once full, a layer of clean soil is placed over the top of them and thats that.



posted on Sep, 12 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   
nO, NO, NO, ....wE ShouLD Add mOre chemicals (like the mosquito killing kind)

Just Think> If we should kill the mosquitos in NO, then we should shovel all of the snow off the North slope of Mt Adams. Seems like a fair comparison to me. (unless global warming has beat us to it)

Follow the money- chemical companies- property owners- investment- YOU know what they will do. They will rebuild the same chemical companies- on the same property- and they will probably get flooded again. There is NO accountability for THEM- to clean up their own milk spills. Capitalism - doesn't let them rethink their strategy. They will level the land, rebuild, and start over. IMHO



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 12:55 AM
link   


Well, finally! The truth of the things I have been saying on this thread are starting to come out!

Hugh Kaufman, the EPA wistleblower who exposed the agency's deliberate failure to reveal the dangers of the air quality during the WTC cleanup, is now asserting the EPA is failing to disclose far greater dangers concerning the toxic mess in New Orleans!




Cover-up: toxic waters 'will make New Orleans unsafe for a decade'

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Correspondent
Published: 11 September 2005

Toxic chemicals in the New Orleans flood waters will make the city unsafe for full human habitation for a decade, a US government official has told The Independent on Sunday. And, he added, the Bush administration is covering up the danger.

In an exclusive interview, Hugh Kaufman, an expert on toxic waste and responses to environmental disasters at the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), said the way the polluted water was being pumped out was increasing the danger to health.

The pollution was far worse than had been admitted, he said, because his agency was failing to take enough samples and was refusing to make public the results of those it had analyzed. "Inept political hacks" running the clean-up will imperil the health of low-income migrant workers by getting them to do the work.


Folks, as I mentioned above, the EPA has done this before! Mr. Kaufman is the guy who ratted the EPA out the first time, and now he is doing it again with regard to New Orleans.

In case anyone is wondering, few now doubt his allegations concerning what the EPA did (or purposely failed to do) during the WTC cleanup.




'World Trade Center Cough' Identified

A study in the Sept. 12 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine shows that 332 firefighters suffered from what became known as "World Trade Center cough." That's about 3% of the nearly 11,000 who responded to the disaster. World Trade Center cough was characterized as a prolonged, severe cough accompanied by shortness of breath...

Researcher David J. Prezant, MD, and colleagues reported that these firefighters were ill enough to take medical leave of at least four weeks. Less than half went back to work within seven months...

The vast majority of cough sufferers also developed heartburn or acid reflux disease...


CDC

The symptoms most frequently reported as developing or increasing after September 11th were nose or throat irritations, in 66 percent of the population; eye irritation or infection, in 50 percent; and coughing, in 47 percent. At the time of the survey, these symptoms were still a problem in approximately 82 percent...

...severe worries about whether their respiratory condition will get worse over time and whether this is a harbinger for additional related illnesses or unrelated illnesses, such as cancer...


Clinton Outraged by EPA's Suppression of Information Following World Trade Center Disaster

According to a report released by the Inspector General of the Environmental Protection Agency, despite evidence that deadly contaminants were contained in the WTC debris, including, asbestos, lead, glass fibers and concrete, the EPA did not accurately convey information about the potential health hazards these substances posed.


And now they are doing it again. Only this is MUCH WORSE!

The Independent article continues...




...Few people are better qualified to judge the extent of the problem. Mr Kaufman, who has been with the EPA since it was founded 35 years ago, helped to set up its hazardous waste programme. After serving as chief investigator to the EPA's ombudsman, he is now senior policy analyst in its Office of Solid Wastes and Emergency Response... He said the clean-up needed to be "the most massive public works exercise ever done", adding: "It will take 10 years to get everything up and running and safe."


Note he said "NEEDED" to be. That means we are actively IGNORING this!




Mr Kaufman claimed the Bush administration was playing down the need for a clean-up: the EPA has not been included in the core White House group tackling the crisis. "Its budget has been cut and inept political hacks have been put in key positions," Mr Kaufman said. "All the money for emergency response has gone to buy guns and cowboys - which don't do anything when a hurricane hits. We were less prepared for this than we would have been on 10 September 2001."


Isn't this the same story concerning FEMA???? This board is filled with documented evidence of their 'brain drain' for these very same reasons....



He said the water being pumped out of the city was not being tested for pollution and would damage Lake Pontchartrain and the Mississippi river, and endanger people using it downstream.


You folks want scandal? You want conspiracy? Here is one staring you in the face!

Look again at the EPA's website....

www.epa.gov...

On September 9, 2005, they indicate that they tested 12 samples from September 3-5 time period, and on that date they only generically raised concerns regarding e-coli and lead levels found in the samples...

On September 11, 2005, they released results from only six of these samples taken on September 3rd.



Here are the questions I have....

Why has the EPA only taken a total of 12 samples, despite the fact that we are now more than two weeks into the flooding of New Orleans???

As documented previously in this thread, why has the EPA only taken samples in residential areas of New Orleans and none at the commercial or industrial areas???

Why were only September 3rd sample results released??? Where are the other six? You should note, that it stands to reason that any sample taken further in time from the date of the initial flooding, the more likely the increased toxicity. These later samples are likely to reveal far worse. Where are those results?

I still get the sense that some people don't understand the point of this thread. The reason I want the pumping stopped is because New Orlean's (or large parts of it, at the very least) are already lost to us for the LONG TERM.

Did you not read "uninhabitable" above???

Why are we willfully increasing the scope of this disaster by pumping this toxic mess into Lake Pontchartrain, and therefore subsequently into the estuaries surrounding New Orleans and the Gulf of Mexico? Does anyone have any idea what impact this will have on one of the largest habitats for migratory birds? On commercial fishing? Oysters? Shrimp? Blue crab? Sugarcane? Feed grains?

And in case you missed it, NEW ORLEANS WILL STILL BE UNINHABITABLE!

Think about it, folks. This isn't as simple as pumping the water out of New Orleans and scrubbing a few walls and calling it a day.

New Orleans notoriously inters it's dead above ground because of its high water table. The contamination will certainly have penetrated the water table, making cleanup all the more difficult.

Dangerous mold will certainly infest every corner of the city. This isn't stuff that just looks bad...it's the kind that can really ruin your day!




Negative Health Effects of Mold

Molds produce negative health effects through inflammation, allergy or infection. Allergic reactions, including fever, are common after mold exposure. Symptoms of those exposed to toxic molds which issue mycotoxins both individually or in combination are:

Immune system suppression
Respiratory problems including asthma and infections
Eye irritation with burning, watery or reddened eyes
Cough – dry and hacking
Nose or throat irritation or both
Skin rashes or irritation
Memory impairment
Irritable bowel syndrome
Body aches and pain (Chronic Fatigue)
Food Intolerances and allergies
Headaches
Mood swings
Nasal and sinus congestion


As mentioned above in the thread, some are predicting that potable tap water will not be available in New Orleans for years! Explain to me how an entire city functions long-term on bottled water alone? What do you bathe in? Water your pet's with? This is just insanity....

And then there will be the really toxic spots, those that were already toxic to begin with, only now those area will be far worse and larger...For example, the Agriculture Street Landfill in New Orleans used to be a Superfund site, where they later built homes. Would you live anywhere near there now??? Who do you think in the end will live in these places now???

I just can't believe the insanity. This is like watching a slow moving train wreck!

Face it, folks. We lost New Orleans, and now we are causing the loss of so much more!

And for all of you conspiracy lovers out there, our GOVERNMENT is to blame! Go chase that for awhile....


[edit on 13-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by loam
I just can't believe the insanity. This is like watching a slow moving train wreck!


This latest information is quite disturbing. They have every reason to downplay all this. They need to stop the pumps, and get those remaining people out of there.

This sounds like our own Chernobyl happening right before our eyes. Why doesn't the EPA do something?



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
Why doesn't the EPA do something?


Why didn't FEMA do anything? They each suffer from the same cancerous influences. There seems to be few who are willing to hold them accountable. The MEDIA is failing us here too...

I fully expect, when it is too late, to see this as the next big story in headlines in the coming months and years.....

I'm just sick over it...



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 03:44 PM
link   
GREAT thread loam.


Keep posting your info, please. It's important.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   
....and you apparently have FAR too much solid information here. It keeps getting displaced by your competitor.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   
I am so sad and sorry to see what your Governors are doing with citizens, the city and the future of the environment & the planet.
Throwing toxics into the Golf will not only contaminate that part of the ocean but contaminate all the creatures living there, spreading this to many other areas.
We are not watching a horror movie. This is real & it is so frustrating.

Yesterday, a person who has been at the Convention Center during Katrina (from a political party of Cataluña-Spain), was interviewed on a spanish National Tv channel. She explained her experience and it´s amazing, but I have to repeat one thing she said:
"I asked myself what they had been giving them to drink since childhood in order that they had lost their critique, their independence of seeing things, their own opinion, their freedom..."

I felt so sad.
Because I know there are many of you who have your own opinion. Who fight for your independence and freedom... They just cannot continue pumping NO. Besides, NO should not be used anymore.

Text for Governors: - Build it elsewhere. Give grants to those who lost everything. But do not give them a hope based on fiction. NO is lost.
It was lost since 1817 when it was build below sea level... Nowadays we know where it is, what it means living there, the danger... Do not repeat the same mistake again. Lives depend on that decision...
STOP PUMPING NOW!-

Loam your information is excellent.
You express the real true, neutral, just the way it is. Or at least how we think it is, cause it might be worse. What about chemicals, all these Labs and primates, what about anthrax (I´ve read on the board they were testing it in NO)...?
I just cannot imagine the consequences of pumping this water out of NO (no matter where it is pumped to). As well as I cannot imagine the consequences of living there again...

As I said before.
I am really sorry.

You don´t deserve it.



posted on Sep, 13 2005 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Thank you for your watchfulness and updates. I am relatively new to this
forum, so forgive me if I am speaking out of turn. This toxic sludge will have devastating repurcussions in the Gulf of Mexico and the Mississippi Delta but have there been any predictions, calculations, speculations, etc. as to what effect this sludge would also impact when it reaches the The Gulf Stream and starts traveling around Florida and up the eastern seaboard?



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kanza
have there been any predictions, calculations, speculations, etc. as to what effect this sludge would also impact when it reaches the The Gulf Stream and starts traveling around Florida and up the eastern seaboard?


Speaking of sludge in the water, The Gulf of Mexico has a westward current coming out of the mississippi... the dead zone at the mouth of the mississippi is heading towards galvaston texas.

The gulf stream comes up west of cuba... into the gulf... then around florida and up past the eastern US. In doing so it diverts freshwater coming out of the mississippi westward.

oceancurrents.rsmas.miami.edu...

www.ncat.org...

Loam... you have been doing a great job covering this story, thanks!

Peace,

Sri Oracle

[edit on 14-9-2005 by Sri Oracle]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 02:26 AM
link   
So sad. Apparently the pollution has reached Galveston, according to a thing Drudge linked to earlier. It's an article about some dolphins that were washed out of a Mississippi aquarium, who were found huddled together, still alive, in the fetid waters off Gulfport

Not sure how long the drudge link will work so am pasting whole thing here- hope that;s ok.
8 BOTTLENOSE DOLPHINS FOUND OFF GULFPORT
Tue Sep 13 2005 19:59:07 ET

Eight bottlenose dolphins that were washed out of their Mississippi aquarium pool during Hurricane Katrina have been found alive, huddled together in the fetid waters off Gulfport, Miss, the BOSTON GLOBE will report on Wednesday.

Now, deeply worried about the dolphins' chances of survival, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration officials and aquarium biologists are racing to rescue the weak and wounded animals - some of which have never before ventured into the wild.

"These animals found us, they came back after Katrina ... they came home," said Moby Solangi, president of the Marine Life Oceanarium in Gulfport. "All eight are together. It's the most wonderful news."

Established in 1956, the facility suffered catastrophic damage in the storm. Along with the dolphins, 19 sea lions were swept out of their pools when a giant storm surge engulfed the Oceanarium. Five of them are still missing.

Developing...

PS. Loam- great stuff. Thanks, man.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 03:32 AM
link   
I just can't help myself....

I keep reading in various publications the statements of politicians and government bureaucrats downplaying the long-term toxicity of the city. The vast majority of lazy media correspondents, content with being spoon-fed the “official” government dribble that everything will be just peachy, have failed to ask the hard questions or do their homework. For the remaining journalists, who have attempted to investigate the issues further, the EPA has stood firmly in their way….



Journalists face long FOIA delays

By Elisabeth Goodridge, Associated Press Writer, September 12, 2005

WASHINGTON --After badgering the Environmental Protection Agency for days to learn where dangerous chemicals were leaking after Hurricane Katrina, Mark Schleifstein still couldn't get a clear answer.

The top hurricane reporter of The Times-Picayune of New Orleans filed a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act, asking for any reports on spills, accidents or fires. More than a week later, he has received no response.

------------------------

New Society of Environmental Journalists report: Katrina only latest example of feds withholding environmental data

Journalists are having an increasingly difficult time using the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to drag information out of the federal government to shed light on Superfund sites, chemical factories, mining accidents and a host of other topics important to citizens.

An SEJ report released today says the failure of the Environmental Protection Agency to divulge information about chemical releases in the wake of Hurricane Katrina is only the latest in a long line of problems journalists are encountering in using FOIA.


I have read (even on this board) that the EPA’s release of sample data clearly indicates that the only apparent threat relates to e-coli and unexpectedly high levels of lead. Again, I ask anyone who is reading this—no, I implore you to OPEN YOUR EYES!

On September 7, 2005, the EPA published the following press release:



EPA and CDC Report High Levels of Bacterial Contamination in Preliminary Floodwater Samples from New Orleans

Floodwaters from multiple locations across the New Orleans area were sampled by EPA and analyzed for chemicals and bacteria. These initial results represent the beginning of extensive sampling efforts and do not represent the condition of all flood waters throughout the area. Preliminary information indicates that bacteria counts for E. coli in sampled areas greatly exceed EPA's recommended levels for contact. At these levels, human contact with water should be avoided.

Additional chemical sampling was performed for priority pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), total metals, pesticides, herbicides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Results from these analyses were compared to various ATSDR and EPA health levels. Lead concentrations in water exceeded drinking water action levels. These levels are a concern if a child ingests large amounts of flood water. For the additional chemicals tested, we have yet to detect contaminant levels that would pose human health risks. Due to the priority of the search and rescue mission, EPA testing has focused on neighborhoods and not in heavily industrialized areas.


Notice how this initial press release implies that they have been sampling water from all over the city. Note also the qualifying statements that “initial results represent the beginning of extensive sampling efforts and do not represent the condition of all flood waters throughout the area…EPA testing has focused on neighborhoods and not in heavily industrialized areas. "

As you will see later in an EPA press release, samples were taken between September 3-5, 2005. That is only one week from the day of Katrina’s landfall. It should also be noted that the widespread flooding caused by the levee breaches only fully occurred within the city approximately 48 hours after landfall by August 31, 2005. When the September 3rd chemically tested samples were taken, they would only have been from flood waters that were roughly a little more than three days old!

On September 8, 2005, the EPA published an update to their September 7, 2005, press release:



Updated: EPA and CDC Report High Levels of Bacterial Contamination in Preliminary Floodwater Samples from New Orleans

Floodwaters from six locations across the New Orleans area were sampled by EPA and analyzed for chemicals and bacteria. These initial results represent the beginning of extensive sampling efforts and do not represent the condition of all flood waters throughout the area. Preliminary information indicates that bacteria counts for E. coli in sampled areas greatly exceed EPA’s recommended levels for contact. At these levels, human contact with water should be avoided as much as possible…

Chemical sampling was performed for over one hundred priority pollutants such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs), total metals, pesticides, herbicides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)….


The updated press release continues almost verbatim to the September 7, 2005, release. (There is additional language addressing health concerns associated with direct contact to any standing water.)

Note that the updated press release changes “multiple locations” to “six locations”. Note also, that language went from “Additional chemical sampling was performed for priority pollutants” to “Chemical sampling was performed for over one hundred priority pollutants.” (Please understand that this means they tested for 100 chemical within the 6 samples. It does not me they had an additional 100 samples.)

On September 9, 2005, the EPA published the following press release:



First Flood-Water Sampling Data Available Online

The Environmental Protection Agency in coordination with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality today posted data from New Orleans flood water samples collected from 12 locations in the September 3-5 time period. The data has been reviewed and validated through a quality assurance process to ensure scientific accuracy.

Initial biological results indicated the presence of high levels of E. coli in sampled areas. Based on that preliminary information, on September 7 EPA and CDC provided health guidance to avoid human contact with flood water when possible.

EPA in coordination with federal, state and local agencies will continue to release data as it becomes available. A map displaying sampling locations is available on the EPA website. To view the data, please visit: www.epa.gov...


For the first time we learn we have samples from 12 locations and not six. But, wait! When viewing the data hyperlink for “biological testing” conducted on September 3, 4 & 5, 2005, (located here), we clearly see what can only be described as a confusing mess of contradictory tables and maps.

In the table found on that page, we see that on September 3, 2005, there were only 6 samples taken. (Look at the sample numbers. The double entries are for E Coli and Total Coliform each, but they are the same sample.) On September 4, 2005, the table indicates four additional samples were taken. And, on Spetmeber 5, 2005, the table indicates two additional samples were taken.

Again, note that the table indicates there were 12 samples, NOT locations.

Now, look at this map found on the same page and pay particular attention to the legend.

[img] www.epa.gov...[/img]

According to the map, there are 9 locations and 19 samples! Huh??? You have to look at this map very closely.

Starting from left to right, here is how they break down….(Look at the far upper left hand corner…)

1) A single sample on September 4, 2005
2) Three samples, one each day, September 3-5, 2005
3) A single sample on September 4, 2005
4) Three samples, one on September 3, 2005 and two on September 4, 2005
5) A single sample on September 4, 2005
6) Two samples, one on September 3, 2005 and one on September 4, 2005
7) Three samples, one each day, September 3-5, 2005
8) Three samples, one each day, September 3-5, 2005
9) Two samples, one on September 3, 2005 and one on September 4, 2005

According to the map, then, we now have 19 samples taken from 9 locations.

By date, they breakdown as follows:

September 3, 2005 = 6 samples
September 4, 2005 = 10 samples
September 5, 2005 = 3 samples

Why does the press release indicate 12 locations, but the map only shows 9 locations?
Why does the table only show 12 samples, but the map shows 19 samples?
Where are the results of the remaining samples?

Next, look at the “chemical testing” conducted only on September 3, 2005, (located here).

It provides the following map:



Clearly here we have only 6 locations tested.

Because results are categorized by the following addresses, we can also safely assume there were only six samples.




Site 1: West End Blvd Veterans Highway (I-10 and I-61)
Site 2: Airline Highway and Causeway Blvd
Site 3: North Claiborne Ave exit ramp (Exit 236B) off I-10
Site 4: Off I-10 near Exit 239 Louisa St and Almonaster Ave
Site 5: Off I-10 near Exit 240B Chef Menteur Highway (US Hwy 90)
Site 6: Off I-610 near Exit 2A between Paris St and St. Bernards St



Of all of the six sites tested, only site 3 produced a level of any chemical exceeding EPA’s limits. In this case, lead was found.

Does this really surprise anyone? Remember, the EPA in their infinite wisdom, judgment and expertise only tested “residential” areas for chemical contamination, on a single day, only three days after the city was flooded, in only six locations. Why aren’t there more samples? DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE???!!!

Look at nearly ANY picture of the flooding in New Orleans and tell me what you see??? What are the people, who are there, saying about the smell and obvious quality of the water???



The MEDIA seems content to be fed the EPA’s assurances that all is well and good in the world. Yet, ask yourself, is the EPA a trustworthy source? I have already documented much that is wrong with this federal agency, in this thread and elsewhere, but I surprising continue to hear from colleagues and members of this board that “if the EPA says it’s OK, then that is good enough for me.”

Look, has anybody considered why the EPA selected the locations that they did??? Look at those maps more closely…..Aren’t they all on the interstates or very near dry land??? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? What happened to the EPA’s 65 boats, now that it appears *their* rescue efforts are no longer needed???

Wouldn’t it be logical to obtain samples in those areas where you know there is a high risk of contamination?

For example, this shows where all the gas stations and other petroleum nasties are:

external image

Or better yet, how about looking at the sites the EPA knows are HAZMAT or SUPERFUND listed?

[img=572x367] www-apps.niehs.nih.gov...[/img]

What’s this I see???? Is that a yellow star??? A SUPERFUND site??? Did we go there???

Of course not! The EPA knows that area very well. They have been screwing residents there for decades.

In case anyone is interested, the yellow star is known as the Agriculture Street Landfill (ASL). I mentioned it briefly in one of my previous post.

On September 1, 2005, Solid Waste & Recycling Magazine, reported the following:




Love Canal-type landfill submerged in New Orleans floodwaters

Overlooked in many news reports about the unfolding storm disaster in the southern United States, especially in the City of New Orleans, in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, is a potentially dramatic pollution issue related to a toxic landfill that sits under the flood waters right in the city's downtown, according to map overlays of the flooded area. The situation could exacerbate the already dire threat to human health and the environment from the flood waters.

The Agriculture Street Landfill (ASL) is situated on a 95-acre site in New Orleans, Orleans Parish, Louisiana. The ASL is a federally registered Superfund site, and is on the National Priorities List of highly contaminated sites requiring cleanup and containment. A few years ago the site, which sits underneath and beside houses and a school, was fenced and covered with clean soil. However, three feet or more of flood waters could potentially cause the landfill's toxic contents – the result of decades of municipal and industrial waste dumping – to leach out.

Houses and buildings that were constructed in later years directly atop parts of the landfill. Residents report unusual cancers and health problems and have lobbied for years to be relocated away from the old contaminated site, which contains not only municipal garbage, but buried industrial wastes such as what would be produced by service stations and dry cleaners, manufacturers or burning. The site was routinely sprayed with DDT in the 1940s and 50s and, in 1962, 300,000 cubic yards of excess fill were removed from ASL because of ongoing subsurface fires. (The site was nicknamed "Dante's Inferno" because of the fires.)

The ASL can be thought of a sort of Love Canal for New Orleans -– and now it sits under water...

Disturbingly, the site is also very close to the Industrial Canal Levee, a section of which collapsed and allowed flood waters to pour in, almost directly in the direction of the ASL site.


You don’t say?

If you’re curious to know exactly where this site is located, then click here and match up the intersection of Higgins Blvd and St. Ferdinands St. to this map from the EPA:

external image

Hmmm….What’s that I see? LEAD???? Where have I seen that before???

You can read all about the Agriculture Street Landfill’s history here.

But, let me give you some highlights:

- the EPA tested the soil and found it to have over 150 chemicals in it, 50 of which are cancer causing. (EPA Publication, 1999)

- in 2001, the EPA claimed to have removed 2 feet of soil from 99% of the 190 acre site. What they don’t mention is that 90% of the site was inaccessible because of homes, sidewalks, driveways, roads and other obstructions.

In case anyone at the EPA is watching, DID WE SAMPLE THERE???

IDIOTS! And, anyone who believes them….

Enough of my rant….



[edit on 14-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
GREAT thread loam.


Keep posting your info, please. It's important.


Thanks, soficrow. I wish more people were talking about this and trying to make noise on the issue....

Even on this board, I get the sense that there is a "so what" attitude.



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 04:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kanza
but have there been any predictions, calculations, speculations, etc. as to what effect this sludge would also impact when it reaches the The Gulf Stream and starts traveling around Florida and up the eastern seaboard?


I seriously considered this, but came to the conclusion that it was just too early to tell. The Gulf Stream doesn't appear to make it really that close to New Orleans. In fact, it tends to shoot off eddies that would likely push the toxins west toward Texas.

During the massive Mississippi floods in the 90's there was the surprising discovery of fresh water 'streams' within the Gulf Stream off the eastern seaboard, so I guess it's still a very real possibility.

[edit on 14-9-2005 by loam]



posted on Sep, 14 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Hmmm.

Heavy metals. Pesticides and other synthetic chemicals. Cancer causing agents.

Yum. ...Is it too complicated to talk about what happens when all these goodies get together and start forming new compounds, all on their own?



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 12:18 AM
link   
OK, so here is today's latest:




CNN LIVE AT DAYBREAK: Transcript

COSTELLO: Yet another agency of the federal government is under fire for its handling of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. This time it's the EPA. The Society of Environmental Journalists accuses the EPA of being slow to release details about the environmental consequences of Katrina. Several members of the group have filed a Freedom of Information Act request.

PERRY BEEMAN, PRES., SOCIETY OF ENVIRONMENTAL JOURNALISTS: Good morning -- Carol.

COSTELLO: You know I'm looking at a report from the EPA right now that it released yesterday on samples it took in early September. Is this enough or not enough? BEEMAN: I'd say it most certainly is not enough. What has happened here is EPA took two weeks to release data from samples it took a week after this event happened. And so far that's all EPA has released.

And there are really two issues here, Carol, there's the sampling that EPA is doing, but also the request that many reporters have made for information on what chemical releases the companies have reported to EPA to the National Response Center as required by federal law. That information -- none of that information has been released as of last night.

...

COSTELLO: And when you talk about PCBs, you're talking about possible cancer causers and perhaps rescue workers need to know what they're working in to go on.

BEEMAN: That's true. And don't forget the people who never left New Orleans or the people who may want to come back. Some of these chemicals will stick around for a long time. And some of EPA's own people have suggested that it could be many days and years before those are gone.

And, also, we don't know that they're testing sediments. And when you're dumping this in the lake, and if those chemicals are lining the sediment, and the air starts turning it up, it could be, you know, swirling around for quite a while.

COSTELLO: Perry Beeman, I know you'll keep working on it. Perry Beeman from the Society of Environmental Journalists, thank you for joining DAYBREAK this morning.



And this strikes no one as strange? Unacceptable?

Even worse news.....They are now draining directly into the Mississippi River!




Polluted Waters Drown Environmental Efforts

NEW ORLEANS — The high-stakes effort to bail out New Orleans is sending plumes of contaminated, brown, stinking water into Lake Pontchartrain, setting back years of effort to restore the environmentally sensitive home of Gulf Coast marine life.

After festering for two weeks in neighborhoods, commercial districts and industrial zones, the water is laden with bacteria, silt, petroleum products and possibly toxic substances.

City officials confirmed Tuesday that they were also releasing untreated sewage into the Mississippi River from one of two treatment plants operated by the New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board...

Much of the nation's seafood catch spends some portion of its life in the marshes of Louisiana...



Now we can expect the potential impact will be accelerated by reaching the Gulf of Mexico directly!

Pull up a chair folks! This is getting uglier by the minute. Popcorn, anyone?

[edit on 15-9-2005 by loam]





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join