Jump to content


Another coal ash spill


4 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_Drew_*

Guest_Drew_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 March 2009 - 03:49 PM

This is a minor spill but a spill nonetheless.

4,000 gallons of fly ash spills in Potomac
http://www.insidenov..._potomac/31563/

Potomac mostly spared by coal ash spill
http://www.google.co...KqSA9AD96RBM301

#2 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 March 2009 - 07:33 PM

Wow do you know what is absolutely HILARIOUS about this....the Baltimore Sun did an article on how many old coal mines are being used as dumps for fly ash. There are 18 mines in Western Maryland currently recieving fly ash and it is less regulated (i.e not at all) than holding it in outside ponds. Given that there was a huge settlement for ground water contamination from two fly ash dumps recently I was shocked to hear how this article portrayed the use of old mines as beneficial. Most surprising was touting the benefit of the alkaline fly ash as lessening some of the effects of acid mine drainage. Oh to be a fly on the wall a few floors above my office this week. :mrgreen: I'm sure there will some fun conversations back and forth.

I'm kind of puzzled how a mine with pourous rock leaches acid drainage for 100 years, but the leachate from a mine filled with fly ash suddenly doesn't do the same thing, but it does and it's lessens the AMD?

Best part of the second link "stayed on the banks of the Potomac River and didn't seep into the water". That's great, but it's going to rain tomorrow. Why are we still determining whether or not something was harmful by the immediate reactions of dead or dying fish?

#3 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2009 - 06:42 AM

Best part of the second link "stayed on the banks of the Potomac River and didn't seep into the water". That's great, but it's going to rain tomorrow. Why are we still determining whether or not something was harmful by the immediate reactions of dead or dying fish?

People can be willfully stupid and believe what they want to believe. This is related to the fact that most people have no idea of fundamental chemistry and physics, so the concept of slow-motion processes like spreading groundwater contamination is very abstract as opposed, say, to ranking the top 12 American Idol contestants. For anyone who cares about these problems it's like shouting at a wall.

#4 Guest_ashtonmj_*

Guest_ashtonmj_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2009 - 07:21 AM

This is related to the fact that most people have no idea of fundamental chemistry and physics,


Amen to that.

Drew, why do you get better news updates with regional news? It just made the obscure environment section of the Sun. Two of the three preceeding stories are "Power plant waste storage to be reviewed" (i.e. TVA spill) and "Debate smolders over coal ash saftey".

#5 Guest_Drew_*

Guest_Drew_*
  • Guests

Posted 11 March 2009 - 09:09 AM

Amen to that.

Drew, why do you get better news updates with regional news? It just made the obscure environment section of the Sun. Two of the three preceeding stories are "Power plant waste storage to be reviewed" (i.e. TVA spill) and "Debate smolders over coal ash saftey".


I guess there is some environmental aware reporter working for the local paper(s). I'm not sure if it is the same person, never paid attention. I check a few news venues during my downtime at work.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users