Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/31/2005 7:57:32 PM EDT
The big one? Disallowing the pumping of contaminated water, sans processing, into the river! Given all the cars, submerged basements, and stores of various types, I'd hate to see an analysis of that soup.

I'm not so sure that it's far fetched as they're not typically in the business of granting exceptions... Perhaps an EO is in order?
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:04:21 PM EDT
Won't happen.

The reason there are restrictions on effluent is that there are intake structures for other water treatment facilities downstream. Inasmuch as there isn't anything downstream of NO to begin with, this isn't particularly an issue. Furthermore, the water treatment facilities in the area are completely offline now, and will be until the flood water has subsided to a manageable level.

The biggest problem facing water treatment plants when they do go back online will be particulate matter, not chemical or biological pollutants. Those are easy to analyze and compensate for. It's the trees, houses, bodies, engine blocks, roofs, locomotives, etc., that really tear the hell out of a treatment plant.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:10:52 PM EDT
Doesn't Boston get into such trouble during heavy rains when they are forced to dump raw sewage with the runoff? If where the intakes were was the driving factor, they wouldn't get dinged as they are going directly into saltwater.

I realize I'm drastically simplfying the topic, but it seems to me that more radical elements in governments might oject to moving that water along...
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:17:50 PM EDT
I'm not sufficiently familiar with the Boston case to comment, but there's a HUGE difference between discharging raw sewage, and discharging stormwater, no matter how murkey that stormwater may appear.

Furthermore, I would not consider EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson a radical element of the US government.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:22:15 PM EDT
Portland is always pumping shit into the Willamette river due to the incompetence and stupidity of the folks who run this place. A fine is about all that ever happens.
matthew
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:46:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DzlBenz:

The biggest problem facing water treatment plants when they do go back online will be particulate matter, not chemical or biological pollutants. Those are easy to analyze and compensate for. It's the trees, houses, bodies, engine blocks, roofs, locomotives, etc., that really tear the hell out of a treatment plant.



The MCL for engine blocks hasn't been promulgated yet, I believe the secondary standard is no more than one V8 (or two fours), per million gallons.

Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:53:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By XJ:
The MCL for engine blocks hasn't been promulgated yet, I believe the secondary standard is no more than one V8 (or two fours), per million gallons.


Depends on displacement and the material the block is cast from. For instance, '77 Chevy Vega iron 4-cylinders with aluminum heads are pieces of shit, so they go straight through to the sludge pond.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 8:59:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By XJ:
The MCL for engine blocks hasn't been promulgated yet, I believe the secondary standard is no more than one V8 (or two fours), per million gallons.






Damn that sounds like something that would come down from a state or federal agency.
Link Posted: 8/31/2005 9:00:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DriftPunch:
I realize I'm drastically simplfying the topic, but it seems to me that more radical elements in governments might oject to moving that water along...



They may very well have objections. But you know what? There's not a damn thing they can do about it.

When natural disaster comes about, all regulations generally get thrown out the window.

And, for the most part, there is no way in hell to treat all that water. Talk about binding a filter in two wink's of a coal miner's eye.
Top Top