Posts by Snoozy

8

The Love Canal Tragedy:

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the love canal tragedy #endeditable end page name begin content area #begineditable "content" .

by eckardt c. beck.

Snoozy

Part 3:

Quite the contrary.

We suspect that there are hundreds of such chemical dumpsites across this Nation.

Unlike Love Canal, few are situated so close to human settlements. But without a doubt, many of these old dumpsites are time bombs with burning fuses -- their contents slowly leaching out. And the next victim cold be a water supply, or a sensitive wetland.

The presence of various types of toxic substances in our environment has become increasingly widespread -- a fact that President Carter has called "one of the grimmest discoveries of the modern era."

Chemical sales in the United States now exceed a mind-boggling $112 billion per year, with as many as 70,000 chemical substances in commerce.

Love Canal can now be added to a growing list of environmental disasters involving toxics, ranging from industrial workers stricken by nervous disorders and cancers to the discovery of toxic materials in the milk of nursing mothers.

Through the national environmental program it administers, the Environmental Protection Agency is attempting to draw a chain of Congressional acts around the toxics problem.

The Clean Air and Water Acts, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Pesticide Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act -- each is an essential link.

Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, EPA is making grants available to States to help them establish programs to assure the safe handling and disposal of hazardous wastes. As guidance for such programs, we are working to make sure that State inventories of industrial waste disposal sites include full assessments of any potential dangers created by these sites.

Also, EPA recently proposed a system to ensure that the more than 35 million tons of hazardous wastes produced in the U.S. each year, including most chemical wastes, are disposed of safely. Hazardous wastes will be controlled from point of generation to their ultimate disposal, and dangerous pratices now resulting in serious threats to health and environment will not be allowed.

Although we are taking these aggressive strides to make sure that hazardous waste is safely managed, there remains the question of liability regarding accidents occurring from wastes disposed of previously. This is a missing link. But no doubt this question will be addressed effectively in the future.

Regarding the missing link of liability, if health-related dangers are detected, what are we as s people willing to spend to correct the situation? How much risk are we willing to accept? Who's going to pick up the tab?

One of the chief problems we are up against is that ownership of these sites frequently shifts over the years, making liability difficult to determine in cases of an accident. And no secure mechanisms are in effect for determining such liability.

It is within our power to exercise intelligent and effective controls designed to significantly cut such environmental risks. A tragedy, unfortunately, has now called upon us to decide on the overall level of commitment we desire for defusing future Love Canals. And it is not forgotten that no one has paid more dearly already than the residents of Love Canal.

Snoozy

8

The Love Canal Tragedy:

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the love canal tragedy #endeditable end page name begin content area #begineditable "content" .

by eckardt c. beck.

Snoozy

Part 2:

In an article prepared for the February, 1978 EPA Journal, I wrote, regarding chemical dumpsites in general, that "even though some of these landfills have been closed down, they may stand like ticking time bombs." Just months later, Love Canal exploded.

The explosion was triggered by a record amount of rainfall. Shortly thereafter, the leaching began.

I visited the canal area at that time. Corroding waste-disposal drums could be seen breaking up through the grounds of backyards. Trees and gardens were turning black and dying. One entire swimming pool had been had been popped up from its foundation, afloat now on a small sea of chemicals. Puddles of noxious substances were pointed out to me by the residents. Some of these puddles were in their yards, some were in their basements, others yet were on the school grounds. Everywhere the air had a faint, choking smell. Children returned from play with burns on their hands and faces.

And then there were the birth defects. The New York State Health Department is continuing an investigation into a disturbingly high rate of miscarriages, along with five birth-defect cases detected thus far in the area.

I recall talking with the father of one the children with birth defects. "I heard someone from the press saying that there were only five cases of birth defects here," he told me. "When you go back to your people at EPA, please don't use the phrase 'only five cases.' People must realize that this is a tiny community. Five birth defect cases here is terrifying."

A large percentage of people in Love Canal are also being closely observed because of detected high white-blood-cell counts, a possible precursor of leukemia.

When the citizens of Love Canal were finally evacuated from their homes and their neighborhood, pregnant women and infants were deliberately among the first to be taken out.

"We knew they put chemicals into the canal and filled it over," said one woman, a long-time resident of the Canal area., "but we had no idea the chemicals would invade our homes. We're worried sick about the grandchildren and their children."

Two of this woman's four grandchildren have birth defects. The children were born and raised in the Love Canal community. A granddaughter was born deaf with a cleft palate, an extra row of teeth, and slight retardation. A grandson was born with an eye defect.

Of the chemicals which comprise the brew seeping through the ground and into homes at Love Canal, one of the most prevalent is benzene -- a known human carcinogen, and one detected in high concentrations. But the residents characterize things more simply.

"I've got this slop everywhere," said another man who lives at Love Canal. His daughter also suffers from a congenital defect.

On August 7, New York Governor Hugh Carey announced to the residents of the Canal that the State Government wold purchase the homes affected by chemicals.

On that same day, President Carter approved emergency financial aid for the Love Canal area (the first emergency funds ever to be approved for something other than a "natural" disaster), and the U.S. Senate approved a "sense of Congress" amendment saying that Federal aid should be forthcoming to relieve the serious environmental disaster which had occurred.

By the month's end, 98 families had already been evacuated. Another 46 had found temporary housing. Soon after, all families would be gone from the most contaminated areas -- a total of 221 families have moved or agreed to be moved.

State figures show more than 200 purchase offers for homes have been made, totaling nearly $7 million.

A plan is being set in motion now to implement technical procedures designed to meet the seemingly impossible job of detoxifying the Canal area. The plan calls for a trench system to drain chemicals from the Canal. It is a difficult procedure, and we are keeping our fingers crossed that it will yield some degree of success.

I have been very pleased with the high degree of cooperation in this case among local, State, and Federal governments, and with the swiftness by which the Congress and the President have acted to make funds available.

But this is not really where the story ends.

8

The Love Canal Tragedy:

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the love canal tragedy #endeditable end page name begin content area #begineditable "content" .

by eckardt c. beck.

Snoozy

Part 1:

The Love Canal Tragedy

by Eckardt C. Beck
[EPA Journal - January 1979]

If you get there before I do
Tell 'em I'm a comin' too
To see the things so wondrous true
At Love's new Model City
(From a turn-of-the-century advertising jingle promoting the development of Love Canal)

Give me Liberty. I've Already Got Death.
(From a sign displayed by a Love Canal resident, 1978)

Quite simply, Love Canal is one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history.

But that's not the most disturbing fact.

What is worse is that it cannot be regarded as an isolated event. It could happen again--anywhere in this country--unless we move expeditiously to prevent it.

It is a cruel irony that Love Canal was originally meant to be a dream community. That vision belonged to the man for whom the three-block tract of land on the eastern edge of Niagara Falls, New York, was named--William T. Love.

Love felt that by digging a short canal between the upper and lower Niagara Rivers, power could be generated cheaply to fuel the industry and homes of his would-be model city.

But despite considerable backing, Love's project was unable to endure the one-two punch of fluctuations in the economy and Nikola Tesla's discovery of how to economically transmit electricity over great distances by means of an alternating current.

By 1910, the dream was shattered. All that was left to commemorate Love's hope was a partial ditch where construction of the canal had begun.

In the 1920s the seeds of a genuine nightmare were planted. The canal was turned into a municipal and industrial chemical dumpsite.

Landfills can of course be an environmentally acceptable method of hazardous waste disposal, assuming they are properly sited, managed, and regulated. Love Canal will always remain a perfect historical example of how not to run such an operation.

In 1953, the Hooker Chemical Company, then the owners and operators of the property, covered the canal with earth and sold it to the city for one dollar.

It was a bad buy.

In the late '50s, about 100 homes and a school were built at the site. Perhaps it wasn't William T. Love's model city, but it was a solid, working-class community. For a while.

On the first day of August, 1978, the lead paragraph of a front-page story in the New York Times read:

NIAGARA FALLS, N.Y.--Twenty five years after the Hooker Chemical Company stopped using the Love Canal here as an industrial dump, 82 different compounds, 11 of them suspected carcinogens, have been percolating upward through the soil, their drum containers rotting and leaching their contents into the backyards and basements of 100 homes and a public school built on the banks of the canal

8

The Story of Times Beach ...

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the times beach story.

by marilyn leistner, last mayor of times beach, missouri .

Snoozy

This was the story told by a former mayor of the town. I remember when it all happened. We used to go swimming in the area..I posted it because of all tlhe hush hush that was going on within the government. I lived about 30 miles from the site. But often crossed over the bridge that had Times Beach under it..and watched it slowly deteriorate and turn into a ghost town and the eventual warning signs that went up with the hazardous warnings on the beaches..a little too late!

Similar to what I believe is going on now with the nuclear reactors in Japan.
I noticed that The Love Canal was even mentioned in the story I posted...that is a whole nother story as they say about cover-up. Another poster brought it to my attention.

Youth today just haven't seen and experienced the stories of horrible things like this..they should know about the past.. You have to watch out for yourself and your family. But even then no teling what is going on behind closed government doors..

Snoozy

ps..a afterthought Regarding Times Beach and The Love Canal:

Love Canal, along with Times Beach, Missouri, are important in United States environmental history as the two sites that in large part led to the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA is much more commonly referred to as "Superfund" because of the fund established by the act to help the clean-up of toxic pollution in residential locations such as Love Canal. It has been stated that Love Canal has "become the symbol for what happens when hazardous industrial products are not confined to the workplace but 'hit people where they live' in inestimable amounts." [ 40 ]

Love Canal was not an isolated case. Eckardt C. Beck, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency during the Love Canal crisis suggested that there are probably hundreds of similar dumpsites. [ 27 ] President Carter declared that discovering these dumpsites was "one of the grimmest discoveries of the modern era." [ 27 ] Had the residents of Love Canal been aware that they were residing on toxic chemicals, most would not have moved there in the first place. Beck noted that one main problem remains that ownership of such chemical companies can change over the years making liability difficult to assign (a problem that would be addressed by CERCLA, or the Superfund Act). [ 41 ] Beck contended that increased commitment was necessary to develop controls that would "defuse future Love Canals." [ 27 ]

The free market environmentalist movement has often cited the Love Canal incident as a consequence of government decision-makers not taking responsibility for their decisions. Stroup writes, "The school district owning the land had a laudable but narrow goal: it wanted to provide education cheaply for district children. Government decision makers are seldom held accountable for broader social goals in the way that private owners are by liability rules and potential profits." [ 14 ]

The legacy of the disaster spawned a fictionalized made-for-TV film entitled Lois Gibbs and the Love Canal (1982). A documentary entitled In Our Own Backyard was released in the U.S. in 1983, and Modern Marvels retold the disaster in 2004. Love Canal was also referenced in 1982 film Tootsie, in the 2000 film Erin Brockovich, and the 1998 computer game Blood II: The Chosen.

56

Why you should not worry about Japan's nuclear reactor problems.

by beatthesystem in

a nuclear reactor is built in such a way, that when operating normally, you take out all the moderator rods.

so if these radioactive materials are released into the environment, yes, radioactivity was released, but no, it is not dangerous, at all.

when the uranium splits, it generates a neutron (see above).

Snoozy

Thank you Vill..I never had this happen before but it seems odd things have been happening since Simon has been working on his "New Board"...

43

Have you ever felt an earthquake?

by Iamallcool in

jw
friends

personally, i have never felt an earthquake in my life.

.

Snoozy

5.5 in Missouri in the late 60's. I think the quake was actuallly in Illinois. We are on the New Madrid fault..:(

That was so bad I can't even imagine being in a stronger one!

Snoozy

8

The Story of Times Beach ...

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the times beach story.

by marilyn leistner, last mayor of times beach, missouri .

Snoozy

Part 5:

We were told by outsiders, "There's nothing wrong with dioxin."

We heard daily of more and more people who seemed to be turning against us. Some were open and vehement in their opposition to the buy-out. We were told by outsiders, "There's nothing wrong with dioxin. It's the flood that's causing the buy-out." We explained patiently, "You don't buy homes in a flood plain with 'Superfund' dollars."

I cringe when someone says "Dioxin never hurt anybody." Dioxin has harmed everybody who has come in contact with it. For us it has meant loss of property values, community, neighbors, friends, identity and security, and, most of all, loss of our health. It has meant marital discord, discipline problems in school children, a type of forced bankruptcy, red-lining by insurance companies, loss of liability insurance on property.

While some of us are still in temporary housing, our payments to the banks on our Times Beach mortgages continues. In some temporary homes, our utilities are higher, it is farther to our jobs, and many of our children lack the self-reliance their older brothers and sisters showed at their ages. We feel rejected by our new neighbors and viewed curiously by all. Consequently, many of us are on the defensive although we are not sure we should be.

8

The Story of Times Beach ...

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the times beach story.

by marilyn leistner, last mayor of times beach, missouri .

Snoozy

Part 4:

Children learned from watching television that "dioxin dirt" from The Beach fed to laboratory animals killed them.

Media coverage intensified our children's concern. Children learned from watching television that "dioxin" dirt from The Beach fed to laboratory animals killed them. The very dirt they walked on, played in and rode their bicycles over was killing animals. One very small boy asked his father if he was going to die too. Headlines such as "EPA Spokesman Says Dioxin the Most Toxic Chemical Known to Man" did nothing to alleviate anyone's concern.

The federal and state agencies to whom the Board turned for help knew no more than we did. We asked questions, but the answers were seldom prompt or accurate and were always subject to immediate change. An agency official would interpret a rule one way only to have it changed by some higher authority. We soon learned the rules were being written as we were experiencing the problem. We learned rapidly about agencies and politicians as they learned about us. The big difference was that the agencies and politicians were involved with the problems only 8 hours each day while we lived these same problems 24 hours per day. All of the Board wanted to walk away and never look back; but it was apparent that our friends and relatives needed help.

The Board felt we were in the middle and being pulled on every side. Most of the residents wanted a total buy-out of our properties, but the few who wanted to rebuild their homes and stay were adamant. Threats were made by each faction. City officials were warned to stay out of town as they would be shot on sight. Those still living in town received threats that their homes would be burned. All of us at one time or another received anonymous, threatening, nasty letters.

On February 22, 1983, Anne Burford of the EPA came to Missouri and met with the residents to announce a voluntary "buy-out." Everyone thought our problems were over. We later learned that upon hearing of the buy-out announcement a former resident of Love Canal had said: "Those poor people; their troubles are just beginning."The pressures on city officials became so great that two mayors resigned. When one learned the contaminated soil contained PCBs as well as dioxin, he resigned and moved away. After his resignation, I became Chairman of the Board of Aldermen.

The Mayor kept saying, "Marilyn, I have to get out of this rat race." I begged him to stay; I felt I could not handle it either and I was next in line. I had not realized how scared he was or how close to a nervous breakdown he had been. He slept each night with a gun at his bedside and his very large German Shepherd in his yard. He was hospitalized for several weeks as a result of a particularly bad experience and resigned on April 30, 1983. I became Acting Mayor.

The federal and state agencies were carefully watching the outcome of this contest. On June 7, 1983, I was duly elected mayor by a vote of 312 to 25. I had run for office advocating acceleration of the buy-out and was pleased at the decisive majority I had obtained. We were again sure that within just a few months the buy-out would be well on its way to being over and our lives would settle down. On election day the city, the state, the county and the federal government signed a four party agreement to get the contractors, appraisers and buy-out moving along as rapidly as possible. My first act in office was to get an ordinance passed for the city to take title.

The SBA advised that loans would be made available to the businessmen. Almost everyone applied. Almost everyone was refused. The reason was that a person applying for the loan had to be running a business. There were absolutely no on-going businesses in Times Beach because the government had cordoned off the town. No outsiders were allowed in the town, and nothing in the town was to be removed from it.

It was August before the first offers were made to begin the buy-out. The offers were low, and again our city was in the forefront of the news. We had gained many friends and supporters nationwide and the media had been instrumental in getting our story before the nation and to the decision makers during the months since the flood. Later as reporters became aware of dioxin and its dangers many became fearful and antagonistic. Reporters refused to enter the town without protective gear.

The low offers and threats of condemnation within 30 days if offers were not accepted caused resentment on our part, and the residents were labeled ungrateful and money hungry. Again the media was instrumental in publicizing our plight. After the board met with legislators and the contractor for the buy-out it seemed better offers were received.

When the first low offers were made the city officials called the contractor and Federal Emergency Management Agency but could get nothing changed. Home owners spray-painted their offers on their homes with TV cameras focused on them. Offers improved. Because of our contact with the legislators and backing by the media, the appeal process was instituted.

As time passed, reporters who were once sympathetic were encouraged to avoid writing of Times Beach and dioxin. Times Beach had lost appeal and sensationalism. We started with a giving, generous, sympathetic, responding public. As dioxin information became available and the public learned of its dangers we became suspect. We might be carriers. Children from surrounding, uncontaminated areas were told not to associate with the Times Beach children at school.

8

The Story of Times Beach ...

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the times beach story.

by marilyn leistner, last mayor of times beach, missouri .

Snoozy

Part 3:

"If you are in town it is advisable for you to leave and if you are out of town do not go back."

On December 23, 1982, the residents received what we now call our Christmas message. "If you are in town it is advisable for you to leave and if your are out of town do not go back." Our community, virtually overnight, was transformed to a national symbol of something uninhabitable. The news media flooded the world with specials and reports of Times Beach and its contamination. It was at this time that the full impact of the dioxin tragedy registered with our citizens.

At this time, the EPA was also under very close scrutiny by several congressional committees. Times Beach and the EPA both gained national notoriety; one for dual disasters and the other for alleged mismanagement of hazardous waste. The allegation was that the EPA was consorting with the chemical companies which they were supposed to be monitoring. The effect of the EPA publicity was beneficial to us. In an effort to counteract the unfavorable image it was now projecting, the EPA became very concerned with Times Beach. Residents were finally housed under the Flood Insurance Program in spite of their non-participation. Many joined with the city officials in writing letters and signing petitions requesting either a buy-out or relocation of the entire town. The idea that a total buy-out of all the properties was the only solution to the disasters was actively bandied about. Because of the uncertainty of The Beach's future there was a reluctance to continue with the clean-up. Was it or was it not dangerous?

Those brave souls who continued with the clean-up found some of their members breaking out in rashes; others became ill. Some of us were sure the rashes were caused by dioxin, and others felt they came from a combination of mud and cleaning fluids. Some continued with the clean-up while most panicked and did not return.

There were no definite plans for there was no foreseeable future for the city. We were so frustrated we wanted to fight, but we had no opponent. Stress was a constant and serious factor. The healthy became ill, the ill died and while most of us survived, all of us paid a price. We were constantly on the defensive. As our financial and health concerns mounted some of our personal relationships deteriorated. Many became skeptics and sank into depression.

As it was the residents lost control of their lives; the choices were no longer theirs. There was a feeling of futility. City employees were told they had to be trained in the use of protective clothing. Then they lost their city jobs because the city no longer functioned. Without city jobs they no longer had health insurance. Next they learned health insurance rates were unaffordable. As ex-employees of Times Beach, they had to obtain costly physical examinations which they could not afford. Thus insurance was out of the question.

When the Board learned that some of the present government officials were aware of the possible contamination of our community as early as 1972 our distrust mounted. Obviously many of us no longer had faith in government or in the system. Our frustrations were evident as we blamed any and all for our health problems. Our futures were in doubt because of our exposure to this chemical, and no one could assure us that we would even have a future. The more informed we became the more frightened we became. Many took their frustrations out on each other. There was excessive wife and child abuse; fathers and husbands who had seldom or never drank began drinking too much.

8

The Story of Times Beach ...

by Snoozy in

part 1:.

the times beach story.

by marilyn leistner, last mayor of times beach, missouri .