Slashdot Mirror
Cleaning up the Most Toxic Pollution in the World
Hugh Pickens writes "Blacksmith Institute has published their list of the most polluted sites in the world compiled by comparing the toxicity of the contamination, the likelihood of it getting into humans and the number of people affected. For example, ninety-nine percent of the children living in and around the poly-metallic smelter at La Oroya in Peru, owned by the Missouri-based Doe Run Corporation, have blood lead levels that exceed acceptable limits. Scientific American says that despite the massive pollution, it would be relatively cheap and easy to clean up the most dangerous hazards. For $15,000, the radioactive contaminated soil from the Mayak plutonium facility on the shore of the Techa River in the Russian town of Muslyomova could be dug up, saving an estimated 350 lives. 'For about $200, the cost of a refrigerator, we are able to save someone's life,' says Richard Fuller, founder of Blacksmith."
Please tell me more about this $200 fridge.
Companies do accounting to determine the value of everything, including the cost of lawsuits due to deaths caused by their products. Maybe the companies determined that, to them, a human life costs less than $200 dollars. This is not a joke. This really happens.
certain weeds of the Astragalus and Stanleya Genus can clean up areas high in selenium and plants that have high levels of glutathione can help mop up cadmium and other toxic metals. the Astragalus especially can take up oxyanions of the chromium group [molybdenum and tungsten, likely chromium as well] not only that but bacteria like deinococcus radiodurans can withstand high radiation levels can interestingly they bind metals to certain chemical groups, specifically sulfur and selenium compounds. they can also reduce metal ions common to toxic waste sites and in effect lock them up as mineral deposits so that they are not leaching into water supplies. If the metals are not mobile, they are not nearly as poisonous or dangerous as they are leaching into the local water supplies.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
while 7 of the top 10 real polluters are Soviet/Russia and China.
I am not nitpicking when I point out that those are 7 out of 10 most polluted cities/areas, not the biggest polluters. Not the same thing.
If you bother to check the actual data USA consistently comes up in top 5 biggest polluters both per capita and overall. China and (not Soviet anymore) Russia are right up there as well to be sure, but ranting about media propaganda and hypocritcal AlGore elitists doesn't reveal anything about the actual problem, only about your political preferences (and perhaps what radio stations you listen to).
Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
Many of the "companies" you are citing are or were principally owned by government organizations, and are/were immune from litigation. In the cases where they weren't, they were situated in countries where the law does not provide any kind of protection or possible recourse for the poor.
For all you people who complain about litigation, this is why we have it. If your actions adversely affect others, they can seek financial compensation and punitive damages. This has the effect of correcting negative eternalitys if and when they are discovered, and giving people good reason to be careful in determining all the effects of their actions.
I know people have to use chemicals to control insects. The ones that does not disintegrate is not a good idea.