Slashdot Mirror
Pristine Lakes Are Filled With Toxins (bbc.com)
Much of the focus on plastic pollution centres on our oceans. Emerging evidence shows it's also a problem in freshwater, which may even be the source. From a report: "Freshwater systems are increasingly studied but still at a much smaller scale than oceans," says Filella. This may simple be due to the fact that initial studies focused on the ocean -- and so research proposals and grants followed suit. It didn't take long for the Geneva team to find what they were looking for. Filella and colleagues collected over 3,000 samples. They went on to analyse 670 of these, revealing some worrying results. Many of these samples contained hazardous and toxic elements including cadmium, mercury and lead -- in some cases in "very high concentrations", as outlined in a 2018 paper in the journal Frontiers of Environmental Science.
A large proportion of these toxic elements are now banned or restricted. This "reflected the age and residence time of the plastic stock in the lake," says Filella: the plastic waste has been building up over several decades. And as we know, plastic can take hundreds of years to degrade. [...] Lake Geneva is not an outlier. Other lakes show similar levels of pollution. Italy's Lake Garda, for example, also has high levels of plastic waste. A sample from the northern part of the lake contained 1,000 large plastic particles and 450 smaller particles (microplastics) per square metre. [...] It is now becoming clearer that much of the plastic that ends up in the ocean starts off in freshwater bodies in the first place -- estimates suggest it could be as much as 70-80%.
A large proportion of these toxic elements are now banned or restricted. This "reflected the age and residence time of the plastic stock in the lake," says Filella: the plastic waste has been building up over several decades. And as we know, plastic can take hundreds of years to degrade. [...] Lake Geneva is not an outlier. Other lakes show similar levels of pollution. Italy's Lake Garda, for example, also has high levels of plastic waste. A sample from the northern part of the lake contained 1,000 large plastic particles and 450 smaller particles (microplastics) per square metre. [...] It is now becoming clearer that much of the plastic that ends up in the ocean starts off in freshwater bodies in the first place -- estimates suggest it could be as much as 70-80%.
While people are going on about "Climate Change" the REAL IMMEDIATE DANGER is local pollution! Where do you think your water comes from? You are worried about lower Manhattan getting flooded in 2050 while you drink your toxic water! Complete insanity.
Pristine Lakes Are Filled With Toxins
How about, "Lakes Thought To Be Pristine Are Filled With Toxins".
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Virgin plastic doesn't use Cd, Hg, or Pb for catalyzing or production of plastic.,
Yes it does. Hg is used as a catalyst in chlorine production, and ends up in PVC. Pb is used as a stabilizer, and Cd is used to create yellow and red pigments.
There's nothing that says that manufacturers can't make their stuff and do it clean as possible. It's a false dichotomy created by the business community that want to keep their bottom lines fat by passing the costs on the commons.
This is a prime example where government regulations do good.
And so what if things become more expensive. We don't need so much crap in our lives anyway and the health benefits and health savings costs to our society far outweigh any costs.
One of the lakes specifically mentioned, Lake Geneva, is not only not pristine but there is no way that anyone could ever think it would be! It's a large lake with several large towns on the shore. Geneva in particular used to use the water in a factory (the original cause of the famous Jet d'eau) and it has ferries which criss-cross between the shore towns. This is not even close to being "pristine".
...a fair number of "pristine" lakes and waterways contain surprising amounts of heavy metals and other nasty things because they pick them up from natural sources. They casually mention it, but it's a bigger problem than you'd think - usually parts per billion, but that's enough to trigger EPA attention by itself, for example.
The other thing to watch out for is the complete lack of useful numbers in the article. The paper itself has them, and they are certainly high. In fact, they're so high it makes you wonder if they screwed up their tests. They claim 23,700 ppm of lead in some plastic samples. Almost 24 parts per thousand? More than TWO PERCENT lead in plastic as part of the manufacturing process? Or a sample with almost EIGHT PERCENT chromium? In plastic? Are they sure they weren't pointing the detector at their car instead?
Sorry, not buying it. Someone either screwed up the analysis, wrote "parts per million" instead of "parts per billion," or something even dumber.
I was confused by the summary too, so I looked at the study. These heavy metals used to be used in plastics as stabilizers and colour pigments, but are now typically banned. The study used this fact to demonstrate that the plastics they were finding predate regulations (i.e. are old) and have therefore been building up in these lakes for decades.
What have you done to clean up the part of the mess that you made by living in first world conditions?
I've written my representatives frequently to ask that we not shit where we eat. As is my right and responsibility in a democratic republic.
Pollution is also the cost of supplying first world living conditions.
I'm not sure if leaded gasoline was really all that necessary to have a high standard of living. I don't think overfishing is the necessary consequence to feed our populace. And I don't think fertilizer run-off into our freshwater ecosystem is the only way to operate a farm. I think frequent chemical spills is a symptom of mismanagement, poor oversight, incompetence, and criminal negligence.
Obviously you partake, since you're using a computing device connected to the internet
Perhaps the purchase price of my computer did not include all of the necessary the costs. Paying to clean up our environment through tax dollars is a bit like padding the income of every business. As a consumer, in the end I will have to pay.
It is way cheaper for a business to avoid spills than for it to accumulate over decades. We're at a point that we can't force businesses to clean up some of the biggest sites as it would bankrupt them before they could finish the job. I propose that we not let things get to the point where we need the government to step in and clean it up.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
RoHS was only introduced in 2006. It also only applies to electrical equipment.
and have therefore been building up in these lakes for decades.
If they pre-date regulations, then they have not been building up for decades. They accumulated decades ago and are not building up through any human activity now.
In other words, since there is already regulation prohibiting them, this is not a current problem that we can enact more legislation to deal with. This is like someone coming across a thalidomide baby that is grown up, hearing about what happened, and yelling that we need to enact legislation to ban thalidomide. Or hearing about someone killing someone else and demanding that there be more laws prohibiting murder.
Is it news that when people are allowed to use lakes for recreation that they drop junk in the water? Has nobody gone to Shasta during spring break? The solution, of course, is to ban all recreational use of all waterways. Blaming the big evil corporations for people who toss the plastic can rings or other plastic garbage in the water is just nuts.
True, plastics are organic compounds. However, what defines a toxin is that it is a result of an organic *process* meaning it was produced in a living organism.
Also, I'm not being pedantic - these are scientific terms that have specific meanings. Exchanging the terms poison and toxin is just as dumb as calling toxic substances "chemicals."
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
I see, so you expect others to fix the problems you make, rather than fix them through your own actions
Correct. I'll do my job. And other people must do theirs. If this were an anarchy then I would be expected to do everything myself. Grow my own food. Refine my own crude oil.
If some aspect of my behavior must be changed to avoid making further problems, I am fine doing that. But I am not going to convert to asceticism on some to gain a moral high-ground when in practice it will be less effective than acknowledging.
you apparently didn't decide to take into consideration the effects of your purchases on the environment.
Maybe I did, and my actions are not significant enough to matter. I still needed gasoline to get my ass to work. I'm not allowed to own a horse and buggy, it's against city regulations. I guess cities decided shoveling literal tons of shit off the roads was more onerous than the smog.
But what the heck, lets tax the profitable businesses so they have less money to be good stewards with.
Well you assume that every dollar of revenue belongs to a business. Maybe they should have to pay the public for using common resources like lakes, streams, oil, gas, etc. Paying for common services like roads and municipal water is already normal for a business.
Is paying for something the same as a tax? Sometimes it is, but I feel like tax is a dirty word applied to any payment that is unpleasant.
P.S. calling your representative's office is more effective than writing to them. But I've found writing to flow a lot easier.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
In northern Minnesota there is a large national park with pristine wilderness, scenic 500 foot bluffs, and crystal clear lakes popular for fishing and many have over 15 feet of water clarity. It's a popular camping spot, but they only let in a few people per day and make you watch a video of how to leave no trace since it's so untouched. The video says "it's a pristine wilderness, so let's keep it that way."
You can't eat the fish.
Mercury contamination from coal power as far away as china has polluted the lakes to the point many of them aren't safe to eat the fish, or it's a small portion per month.
Pollution is the cost of doing business...
It's not business that's the problem. The problems are deregulation, negligence, inadequate safety standards, cost cutting, mistakes, ignorance, carelessness, indifference and disregard.
... So maybe business should pay to clean it up
It's a start. If the executives at fault lose their own money and go to jail, that would make a world of difference.