EPA unleashes environmental disaster, tries to stone wall and cover up and President is silent

That is correct. Who is responsible for establishing the standards and monitoring the leaks?

TylerDurden said:
My nonsense is some of the most well thought out nonsense on the Internet! But really, I don't think there is any evidence that a massive breach of this magnitude was imminent. If there was evidence of this, I'd expect the EPA would have made people aware prior to taking this course of action.

Except that's not what you suggested in your earlier comment.

TylerDurden said:

Apparently, they were leaking too slowly for the EPA's liking.

An interesting and non-partisan bit of backstory.

http://www.popsci.com/secret-history-epas-animas-river-spill

Despite the URL, it's not very secret.

Steve said:

TylerDurden said:
My nonsense is some of the most well thought out nonsense on the Internet! But really, I don't think there is any evidence that a massive breach of this magnitude was imminent. If there was evidence of this, I'd expect the EPA would have made people aware prior to taking this course of action.

Except that's not what you suggested in your earlier comment.

TylerDurden said:Apparently, they were leaking too slowly for the EPA's liking.

That was just a snarky comment about the leak being too slow for the EPA. In my last post, i was referring to your assertion that the leak could have occurred naturally. I don't believe their is evidence of that. I maintain that if there were we would know about it.

ParticleMan said:
An interesting and non-partisan bit of backstory.
http://www.popsci.com/secret-history-epas-animas-river-spill
Despite the URL, it's not very secret.

Thsnks for the link...interesting stuff. They have to get rid of that ad tho!

As I understand it, 500 gallons per minute of toxic water was already escaping from the mine.

That is my understanding as well. Where are you going with this? Was it 10 gpm a month ago? If so, you may have quite a valid point.

Apparently, it was much lower prior to the the shut down and plugging of another nearby mine (as you know).

eta: Also, water quality diminished following the plugging of the other mine.

I thought the water quality got worse when they closed the treatment plant. But that was some time ago. Its possible I am totally wrong here, as I am jet lagged and my reading comprehension is not good at the moment.

Looking forward, this does seem to be a real strategic issue. Any time you find yourself repeatedly putting your finger in the dike, it is not a good situation. And don't get me wrong, those responsible for the pollution are ethically responsible to pay for the remediation. I fear that ship has sailed though.

Yes, once the treatment plant closed and they plugged the mine that was sending the waste to the treatment plant, it got worse. The EPA has wanted to do a cleanup in this area for years, but there's been local resistance. Had the treatment plant remained open, this would not be a problem.

TylerDurden said:
And don't get me wrong, those responsible for the pollution are ethically responsible to pay for the remediation.

Since I've been calling you on not acknowledging this, it's only fair to acknowledge when you do.

I'm not spending this weekend arguing on MOL, so that's probably my last comment on this thread -- when I check again Monday it'll probably be some discussion amazingly tangential to the current topic ;-)

Note, he said "ethically responsible." Not so sure that he'd go so far as to say that they should be legally responsible to do so.

Of course they should be legally responsible. Unfortunately, most of those entities no longer exist. I'm a big believer in personal responsibility.

As much as I dislike to enter into the "all politics" forum, I would like to relay information that happened here in Maplewood about twenty years ago. There was an electroplating business that operated under very sloppy and hazardous environmental chemical conditions. When the NJ DEP was unable to intervene, the Federal EPA, via the Cleanup Fund, intervened when the factory closed and the factory owners had left a VERY (caps intentional) dangerous mix of hazardous and poisonous chemicals behind. Within a few days, the EPA removed the most hazardous chemicals. The total cleanup of the site under Superfund lasted almost a year. The site is now vacant, but the health hazard to Maplewood residents has been removed. I strongly support the Superfund that was championed by Senator Lautenberg. The basic plan was to have chemical companies fund the Superfund, get the clean up done, and then have the lawyers argue who was at fault. This speeded up cleanups and removed the health hazard to the public. It was a good public health plan.

TylerDurden said:
Of course they should be legally responsible. Unfortunately, most of those entities no longer exist. I'm a big believer in personal responsibility.

But should the government be able to compel the cleanup

Yes

Okay, then. Didn't see that coming.

TylerDurden said:

tjohn said:

TylerDurden said:

tjohn said:

TylerDurden said:
Interesting letter to the editor of the local paper just days before the incident.

Aside from the irrational speculation that this mess is an EPA conspiracy, I couldn't tell from the expert retired geologist exactly what the proper solution was. Was it OK to let the 500 gallons per minute flow of mine water into Cement Creek continue as it was?

Clearly the answer is to let all the pollution leak into the river at once.

Obviously the EPA contractor made a huge mistake, but what is your solution to the original problem? Or is the steady leaching of toxic metals into surface streams not a problem in your book.

So, if the contractor was working for say BP, you wouldn't place the blame on BP? Is that it?
I am not an expert on mining pollution and remediation. The people in those communities were aware of the slow leakage. I do believe the water levels were safe until a few days ago.
But that is despite the point. The point is that the EPA caused a huge environmental event. They screwed up. Its as simple as that. I don't see why people just can't admit this simple fact.
There's a popular thread on this site that states "Facts Matter". Some clearly don't. At least not to many around here.

This is a huge disaster. What's your point. And more importantly what's your planned solution?

RealityForAll said:

tjohn said:
The EPA obviously screwed up and people will be compensated for damages. The problem is the tone of people who somehow think the EPA created this pollution problem in the first place.
And maybe heavy metal seepage rates were such that a cleanup was not required. I don't know. And arsenic is by all accounts poisonous and carcinogenic.

PVW said:

RealityForAll said:

There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.

I see many people on this thread who believe in the mission of the EPA saying the EPA screwed up here and should be held responsible. I have yet to see ZZ, yourself, or tyler durden admit that private industry bears any responsibility here.

By "private industry" do you mean: 1. the mining company which was in business and then out of business before the EPA was established (or the Clean Water Act was enacted); 2. all private industry involved in the mining busines; or. 3. all private industry existing in the US today. Implicit in your private industry comment is your assumption that government entities handle environmental issues in a better manner than private industry. My understanding is that government environmental measures at area 51 (open out burning of chemicals) and SC nuclear facility have the most horrific environmental consequences.

So your solution is to leave private industry to their own standards of environmental protection? The EPA has screwed up mightily in this instance but I would expect that many rivers would look like this without some government standards and oversight.

What countries have a healthy history of environmental protection with little/no oversight?

dave23 said:

tom said:
I don't see realityforall's point here.

That private polluters handle cleanup better than the government. This mine is an example of that apparently. No mention of why the EPA, Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were created in the first place.

Right. Look at how much filthiest Pittsburgh and Cleveland are today as compared to 40 + years ago.

Oh wait they are much cleaner today. Must have been private company self regulation.

tom said:
I don't see realityforall's point here.

Less government = better

Government = evil

EPA = government

EPA = Evil

Obama = government

Obama = EPA = evil

Then argue to death without offering any viable solution.

ParticleMan said:
An interesting and non-partisan bit of backstory.
http://www.popsci.com/secret-history-epas-animas-river-spill
Despite the URL, it's not very secret.

This is a good article. I actually lived in Silverton Colorado directly on the Animus river for two summers. The river has been contaminated by mine tailings for years, we always called it a dead river because there were no fish in it due to contamination. As stated in the article the only reason the whole area isn't a superfund site is because tourism is the main source of income in the area. So when you read that the river is back to pre-event conditions, that isn't saying much, pre-event conditions were pretty horrible. The cleanup of a hundred year old mines is going to be messy, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done or that the EPA isn't doing the right thing.

Here is a photo of where I lived you can see the river peaking through the trees.

When steel plants close, air quality has only one way to go.....which is up ;-

Woot said:

dave23 said:

tom said:
I don't see realityforall's point here.

That private polluters handle cleanup better than the government. This mine is an example of that apparently. No mention of why the EPA, Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were created in the first place.

Right. Look at how much filthiest Pittsburgh and Cleveland are today as compared to 40 + years ago.


Oh wait they are much cleaner today. Must have been private company self regulation.