Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I was astounded in reading this article that no mention was made regarding WHY the toxic waste was left, and where the pollution came from. Twelve years ago as we traveled the country we noted how polluted our inland waters were, and when we talked with locals we heard a lot of complaints about how "nothing was being done." Why are we so accepting of poor water (and air) quality?
Do any readers here have similar stories of such events in their area? Do you know of any actions being taken to clean up their inland waters, because if the desiccation of our waters leaves toxins behind -- that quickly becomes air pollution, as well.
Look up the history of the Salton Sea. The article was bordering on being nothing but targeted blather. Why is the SS drying up? Really? How many people in the country DON'T know about the Colorado River problems? What are the chances of both of them reading the article and becoming informed from it?
Toxic wastes in waterways are and have been addressed. The term is "brownfields." Typically, the sludge is removed and trucked to a remote relatively safe area for storage. However, doing so is costly and only the most concentrated areas can be cleaned. To clean the Salton Sea drainage area would be ridiculously expensive.
The Burlington Vermont waterfront had a brownfield area that dated back to the years that barges were loaded and unloaded in a canal-like area beside a railroad yard. From various reports, it was pretty nasty. All gone now.
Look up the history of the Salton Sea. The article was bordering on being nothing but targeted blather. Why is the SS drying up? Really? How many people in the country DON'T know about the Colorado River problems? What are the chances of both of them reading the article and becoming informed from it?
Toxic wastes in waterways are and have been addressed. The term is "brownfields." Typically, the sludge is removed and trucked to a remote relatively safe area for storage. However, doing so is costly and only the most concentrated areas can be cleaned. To clean the Salton Sea drainage area would be ridiculously expensive.
The Burlington Vermont waterfront had a brownfield area that dated back to the years that barges were loaded and unloaded in a canal-like area beside a railroad yard. From various reports, it was pretty nasty. All gone now.
Totally agree, it was very poorly researched and offered literally nothing new. The SS was created in 1905 by accident and has been drying out ever since. I though everyone knew that. It's certainly been the subject of many articles and videos over many decades. They lost me with this idiotic and contradictory statement "As irrigation systems improve and crops are modified to require less water, less water enters the Salton Sea." And yes, of course with what litter water that was flowing into the SS being polluted by all the chemicals we dump on crops and casually let leach into our water ways, why is it any Suprise that after more than 100 years, those toxic chemicals have accumulated.
Look up the history of the Salton Sea. The article was bordering on being nothing but targeted blather. Why is the SS drying up? Really? How many people in the country DON'T know about the Colorado River problems? What are the chances of both of them reading the article and becoming informed from it?
Toxic wastes in waterways are and have been addressed. The term is "brownfields." Typically, the sludge is removed and trucked to a remote relatively safe area for storage. However, doing so is costly and only the most concentrated areas can be cleaned. To clean the Salton Sea drainage area would be ridiculously expensive.
The Burlington Vermont waterfront had a brownfield area that dated back to the years that barges were loaded and unloaded in a canal-like area beside a railroad yard. From various reports, it was pretty nasty. All gone now.
I didn't ask why the SS was drying up. I asked about the pollution left behind, and why it was not being cleaned up, or prevented from the start. The issue is not limited to the SS. As I said, we saw it across the country. We know our inland waters are polluted, and we ignore it. It's a problem that needs attention.
Quote:
Originally Posted by timfountain
Totally agree, it was very poorly researched and offered literally nothing new. The SS was created in 1905 by accident and has been drying out ever since. I though everyone knew that. It's certainly been the subject of many articles and videos over many decades. They lost me with this idiotic and contradictory statement "As irrigation systems improve and crops are modified to require less water, less water enters the Salton Sea." And yes, of course with what litter water that was flowing into the SS being polluted by all the chemicals we dump on crops and casually let leach into our water ways, why is it any Suprise that after more than 100 years, those toxic chemicals have accumulated.
So, you can only be concerned when you are surprised, or the issue is new?
As the droughts continue and water shortages are a greater problem, or air quality starts presenting itself with respiratory issues, will you be surprised enough to be concerned?
I didn't ask why the SS was drying up. I asked about the pollution left behind, and why it was not being cleaned up, or prevented from the start. The issue is not limited to the SS. As I said, we saw it across the country. We know our inland waters are polluted, and we ignore it. It's a problem that needs attention.
So, you can only be concerned when you are surprised, or the issue is new?
As the droughts continue and water shortages are a greater problem, or air quality starts presenting itself with respiratory issues, will you be surprised enough to be concerned?
And I provided an answer why not all of it is being cleaned up. Prevention at the start? Really? Back before anybody other than possibly a tiny handful of scientists had any inkling of long lasting effects? You might as well ask why infants can't do calculus. The answer is obvious.
The worst areas (I repeat myself) ARE being given attention. In some situations, there can be more danger from fussing with pollutants that are temporarily safe under sediment than leaving them in place.
Your concerns lack perspective. The Salton Sea is far less of a threat than say... the lead in the soil around major cities, the layers of asbestos that coat some towns near old mines, the copper mining tailings, and so on. On a list of priorities, spending money on the SS instead of some of those is foolish.
The bigger issue that not many people are aware of are the big utility companies that have all of these toxic coal ash piles that are contaminating rivers and ground water adjacent to operating or former operating coal power plants. The ratepayers should never pay for the stupidity of big utilities mistakes in power generation choices, or the fact that the toxic coal ash was never sent to landfills, and instead just sat in unlined pits right on top of rivers.
What I am gleaning from the responses offered so far: it's an old problem and there's no money to fix it. It's too small a problem, and other problems are too big.
We'll just carry on until -- what? I picked this article because it is happening now, and it is indicative of problems with inland water nation wide. When I was visiting my home state of Michigan, I was told the Great Lakes were in bad shape. The river where our family used to swim as kids was so murky I didn't even want to splash my feet in it. When we were on Virginia's Eastern Shore, I was told the Chesapeake is so bad that locals said they didn't want to eat the fish from it.
Why aren't there discussions about cleaning up these problems. Why aren't people demanding it? Why aren't we demanding stricter environmental laws? I'm not sure what Timberline is saying with "taxes bad" -- of course no one wants to pay more taxes, but wouldn't there be a long term economic value to having the sites you've mention cleaned up? Wouldn't that be an investment in the future?
Last edited by LookinForMayberry; 11-15-2022 at 09:37 PM..
Reason: Spelling correction
And I provided an answer why not all of it is being cleaned up. ...
Your concerns lack perspective. The Salton Sea is far less of a threat than say... the lead in the soil around major cities, the layers of asbestos that coat some towns near old mines, the copper mining tailings, and so on. On a list of priorities, spending money on the SS instead of some of those is foolish.
"California said it would only reduce its reliance on the over-tapped river if the federal government put up money to mitigate the effects of less water flowing into the sea."
Deconstruct that comment. The larger issue is California and the giant sucking sound of it draining the Colorado River. It knows it has to work to reduce that problem and it will cost $$$ to do so.
As a politician, how do you make that more palatable to the farmers, environmentalists, and whingers? Get Federal (read "free") money for pet projects that have questionable value, so that the harder and less palatable work can be funded and get done.
Notice that the article gave no indication of chemical cleanups in the offing, just some ponds and swamps for use by wildlife and to "reduce dust."
Fools, indeed. However, on a Federal level, $250M is a drop in the bucket. A few politicians and contractors will be happy, on a local level there will be more whinging. "What do you mean you are putting a swamp beside my property?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
