Cleaning up the Most Toxic Pollution in the World 212
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."
Polluted Sites? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Polluted Sites? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: Polluted Sites? (Score:4, Funny)
I'm so putting that on my blogz, lolz.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Polluted Sites? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
WTB!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:WTB!! (Score:5, Funny)
Now you know.
Borders. (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, I'm kind of wondering why there isn't any marks in the US. Are we supposed to be the polluters of the world? Is there a mistake that the US is clean enough not to be on the list?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically "first worlders" have finally developed a strong NIMBYism learned from past mistakes, and are now getting around to cleaning up the mess at home. Unfortuna
Dioxin, sure, but DDT? No. (Score:4, Insightful)
DDT was a casualty of Western gluttony and reactionism. We took something that worked well and sprayed it absolutely everywhere, far in excess of any defensible use, until it created a problem. Then, when we realized it was a problem, we went totally arse over teakettle: banned the stuff completely and pressured other countries to do the same, rather than realizing that it was the irresponsible use that was really to blame, and that there were parts of the world where any rational cost/benefit analysis still called for it.
Re:Dioxin, sure, but DDT? No. (Score:5, Interesting)
I know people have to use chemicals to control insects. The ones that does not disintegrate is not a good idea.
DDT over the top (Score:4, Informative)
DDT is not banned in most of the developing world; it can be obtained, and rather cheaply. Nobody has cut off supplies. What has actually happened is that--- due to massive overuse for agricultural spraying--- many species of Malaria-carrying mosquito have developed immunity. Simultaneously, other more effective pesticides have dropped in price to the point where DDT is just one of many tools in the arsenal (and an ineffective one in most cases). To counter the notion that DDT has been banned everywhere, it's informative to note that a number of countries still use some quantity of DDT in their anti-malaria programs, but these efforts have only limited success and only in certain regions where DDT immunity has not been fully established.
The argument "for" DDT is mostly political, and carried along by people who aren't familiar with the facts. Some people are tempted by the notion that DDT is some kind of panacea for Malaria, but that evil environmentalist hippies are using their awesome power to prevent it. Of course, there's usually very little evidence supporting the latter notion, but it's tempting to believe because it sounds like a "free lunch" solution to a hard problem (one that happens to reinforce some folks' pre-conceived political notions). Unfortunately, the idea founders on, well, just about every basic fact of the story--- including the very important one that many of the nations that would ostensibly be "saved" by DDT use have chosen not to use it because it doesn't work anymore.
http://info-pollution.com/ddtban.htm [info-pollution.com]
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/05/who_put_out_the_contract_on_ra.php#more [scienceblogs.com]
Re:Dioxin, sure, but DDT? No. (Score:4, Informative)
http://timlambert.org/2005/10/crime-of-the-century/ [timlambert.org]
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2007/05/this_week_in_the_unending_war.php [scienceblogs.com]
And so on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mental Pollution is Borderless (Score:4, Interesting)
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).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mental Pollution is Borderless (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously though, it IS about consumption and the methods used to sustain and grow it. The US consumes ~50% of the worlds resources with only ~5% of the population, China and India are busy posioning themselves to stock the shelves of the western world just as Detroit did in the 50's only on a much larger scale.
"To find out if the Slashdot crowd honestly cares about the enviroment, or are simply hypocritcal AlGore elitists, just watch how this thread gets moderated."
Well atm you have +4 interesting and the number of posts on any environmental issue shows a lot of slashdotteres "care" about the issue one way or another. Personally I think I have "cared" about the environment since my parents raised me that way nearly five decades ago. I have no idea if I am an "Al Gore elitist" but I can tell you how the climate, bird and animal species have changed in my small corner of Australia over the last 40yrs.
Gore's documentry is just that, a documentry, it's a "slide show" for laymen that spells out what the IPCC reports say, Al Gore is simply demonstrating his personal and political support for the findings in the reports (ie: they are not "his ideas"). Gore was initially skeptical of AGW but was persuaded by (amoung others) Hansen [wikipedia.org] to change his mind. Regardless of what else Gore has done I would have thought an influential politician with the ability to be skeptical of his own ideas and interested enough to take the time and effort needed to understand the science behind a complex subject would be regarded as a GoodThing(TM), particularly on a "nerd" site.
None of this means that governments of the developing world can shirk their responsibilty or that Al Gore doesn't (ironically) create a shitload of CO2 with his "personal presentations" of the movie to the likes of Bush, Murdoch, Howard, Blair, Putin, et-al. Economic infrastrature has outgrown single nations (eg: oil/gas pipelines, telecomms, food production, ect), what is missing is a coherent science based plan "to preserve the commons" on a scale bigger than any single nation. However as soon as one mentions "global plan" it's "OMG Stalin" rather than "hmmm, the plan to remove lead from car emmisions seems to be working".
Americans responsible for Chernobyl? (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally look at facts and reality, and then I come to a conclusion. You appear to conclude that America is responsible for everything, and then twist any reality or new fact to fit.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you miss the "/ducks" tag or are you just a parinoid patriot?
I'm an Aussie and by all acounts we are just as wastefull and just as arrogant as the US, the only difference is we have less people and therefore get less column inches in any media disscussion.
The whole point of my post was to point out that the cu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Borders. (Score:5, Funny)
Outsourcing (Score:5, Insightful)
We should ensure that any company that does work overseas, does it to US or higher standards. The includes Nike paying US minimum wages and Exxon following US pollution guidelines.
Re:Outsourcing (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Multinationals use international trade regulations to their advantage. By aligning with lending groups like the IMF, multinationals use national debt recovery to force laws through that require full employment and cuts to social welfare systems so that taxes can be levied and surplus budgets can be made to repay international debt. The result: the poor are forced into indentured servitude because they can no longer get social services and those that had higher wages and
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
They play the game according to the rules that the governments of the world set. If you dont like the rules then blame some of those governments for allowing themselves to be duped. In the case of those governments that are totalitarian the people are going to screwed in any case so what is the difference? There are some countries that we the United States won't do business with after all for that reason, although certain European nat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They play the game according to the rules that the governments of the world set. If you dont like the rules then blame some of those governments for allowing themselves to be duped.
The problem is those in power keep changing the rules, and I have no problem blaming those governments who are allowed to be duped; often the people do too. Apparently the people of Argentina did. Although the government signed them up, the people revolted. They knew a scam when they saw one. Unfortunately not all countries educate their citizens about politics and economics.
If those countries choose to borrow from the IMF and or its member nations and by extension us then is it unreasonable for us their creditors to insist upon the adoption or abandonment of certain policies which caused the borrows to be in a position where a loan was needed in the first place?
There is a difference between "choose" and coerced. Basically these countries were told to fix their economy or no more t
Re: (Score:2)
Just few notices...
Argentina and other countries who ha
Re: (Score:2)
>They play the game according to the rules that the governments of the world set.
So essentially you agree with parent, since governments of the world mostly behave as big capital lapdogs. Witness the battle for patentable software in the EU. If governments were expression of the people, RIAA allegations that piracy causes the damage equivalent to the price of the CD would get laughed out of court. And so on.
> He who pays th
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that he blames the corporations for intelligent play while I blame the governments for the bad policies which allow the exploitation in the first place. This is why it is important to educate our children in economics so that they, and by extension their governments, will have the ability to make better economic policy and financial judgments at both the personal (i.e. not taking o
Quoting "The Nation"?! LOL!! (Score:2)
"The Nation" are further to the left than the wall... Quoting them is not "data".
Argentina's problems came entirely from major mismanagement and rejection of the free market principles. The privatized their state-owned enterprises, which was the right thing to do. But then the state spent the proceeds from privatization on propping up the local currency... Voters loved the short-term gains (something stock-holders are frequently accused of preferring, BTw), and when the money ran out, the government began
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Can't exploit people here on American soil? Fine, we'll go somewhere else. Case in point, from TFA: "
Of course the workers are free to choose... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There has to be some basic standards of humanity we have to afford the rest of the world. If we're saving money by sending work abroad by decreasing the safety standards, or by polluting more and costing lives that way, then we're basically buying human lives. In ot
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Not an expert on Nike or defending their actions, but come on, put a little thought into this will you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll thank you not to attribute that to liberalism. I'm very much a liberal, thank you, but I know what you're talking about.
When you start offering higher rates of pay, it becomes less economical. In some industri
Re: (Score:2)
Thats what the unions want you to believe, however, unions support minimum wage laws for
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How about less goods and services from China? I would bet that most Americans, when asked if they prefer higher prices at Walmart in exchange for better wages, worker protection, and environmental protections in China would probably tell you they want lower prices and more American jobs (workers in China be damned as far as they are concerned).
If China wants to sell to
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like the iPhone? What is it, now, $399? Do you know how much it will cost consumers if manufacturing moves to Mexico? $399. The only difference is less profit for Apple. Which I can live with if that's what it takes to ensure that our trading partners aren't running sweatshops.
And what if the Chinese say, "No" to your standards?
Then we negotiate, and we don't give in until we reach something better than the status quo. Why not? What have we got to lose e
Re: (Score:2)
And you're basing this assertion on what, exactly?
I'll tell you what, it's significantly cheaper and easier to ship things from Mexico than it is from China. The reason that the iPhone is manufactured in China is because even given the shipping cost and hassle, it's still cheaper for Apple.
If manufacturing moved to Mexico, do you know what another price of the iPhone could b
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The Chinese hold a significant amount of U.S. currency as a backing reserve for their own. They could announce that they are selling off all U.S. currency reserves, which would sink the value of the dollar almost overnight.
This would send the U.S. into a severe inflation-based depression that would make the deflation-based on in the thirties look like a mild recession, since the Fed is seemingly only capable of inflating the currency even more in a
Re: (Score:2)
Er, should I be the one to point out that those lower prices are because the jobs aren't American? You can either have lower prices because we're taking advantage of
Re: (Score:2)
Er, should I be the one to point out that those lower prices are because the jobs aren't American? You can either have lower prices because we're taking advantage of people around the world and polluting them and paying them less than a living wage, or you can have higher prices because we're paying Americans to do something, and that involves certain levels of environmental control and a living wage.
A "living wage" is a lot, lot lower overseas than it is here. This is because Americans want all sorts of expensive niceties, like fancy cars and iPods and microwave dinners and college educations and cushy retirements and nice houses. What's more, they want all of those things in America, where things are a lot more expensive than they are overseas. And there are huge opportunity costs for employing Americans. If you go into shoe manufacturing, you're not going into medicine and biotech or pharmaceuticals
Re: (Score:2)
If an Asian guy goes into shoe manufacturing, he is probably not giving up a career in biotech.
Maybe if he's in Taiwan. Not so much in Tokyo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Outsourcing (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How about less goods and services from China?
That would be one effect, yes.
China is a sovereign country and they will run their afairs how they choose. You will never win with "forcing" China to comply.
And we are a sovereign nation, too - nobody is forcing us to buy from them. We are adding a proviso to the trade agreement and China is free to take it or leave it. I think they'll take it.
There is no need to "regulate" it per se so long imported products are inspected for safety and the information
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. Profit is the first, and only, goal of business.
And that is why I believe profit-above-all-else mentalities must be destroyed. See, I have no problems with a company that wants to make money. I'm a college student, but I also work part time at a grocery store as a janitor. Why do I work as a janitor? Because I make money doing it. I make exactly $8.50 an hour (and with about 20 hours per week and factoring out taxes) I make about $150 a week. I would not clean toilets and wipe up
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, but you can't legislate morality. It really depends on the individual to make the decision to do the right thing.
U.S. society has become increasingly legalistic, to the point where a good number of people see nothing immoral about their actions provided they're not illegal. There are two answers to that -- we either need to make the laws better, or people need to start to realize the moral implications of their action
Re: (Score:2)
And conversely, when an American company does business in Europe, they have to pay their American workers European minimum wages, and give them European holidays, benefits etc. So if Microsoft want to sell Windows in France, Microsoft workers can't work more than 35 hours a week, with six weeks holidays a year. Otherwise they'd ju
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seeing US Management arrive in a country with less regulation is like seeing Scandinavians in a bottle shop. Some can not believe what they can get away with so they have to try a bit of everything until the locals have a few stern words. Actual slavery in Micronesia would come close to the top of the abuses, but Bhopal was the worst in my opinion. Can't you guys give them an education or cut off their cocaine supply or
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The tendancy of paticularly incompetant managers that suddenly find themselves in a low wage country to see if they can squeeze it furthur again is more likely -
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As for the statement about the shortage of suitable canditates at the time, I know a few Indian engineers over 50 and I don't live in India. Anybody on this forum that studied engineering has probably had an Indian lecturer no matter where i
Re: (Score:2)
Good show!
Re: (Score:2)
Every time I see a company go overseas to do this kind of thing, it breaks my heart.
We should ensure that any company that does work overseas, does it to US or higher standards. The includes Nike paying US minimum wages and Exxon following US pollution guidelines.
If such a law was passed it would result in one of three things. 1. Nike (or other US company) would follow said law, foreign competitor, not bound by such a law, would put them out of business by selling better product for less. 2. Nike (and other US companies) would relocate out of the US and no longer be bound by said law. 3. Nike (and other US companies) would create foreign based companies that would do the manufacturing for them and not be bound by US law. (Actuall
Re: (Score:2)
Great idea, let's start with the Geneva Conventions.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm currently studying in Beijing, and you can get a pair of fake Nikes (I can't notice a change in quality; often the "fakes" are made at the same factories as the "real" ones, even) for 40-50 yuan (about $6). And it's not just transport fees that make them expensive in other countries either, because they're already being transported over half the country to Beijing from places like Guangzhou.
No. 2 is difficult to answer, as the
Dollar value of a human life (Score:3, Interesting)
The value of litigation. (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
certain weeds can fix this (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, the w-*cough*onders of Free Tr-*cough*ade (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it is not (Score:3, Interesting)
Oil Sands (Score:5, Funny)
Russian village huge human nuclear experiment (Score:4, Informative)
Not just toxic sites, but you must stay so the gov can study you!
From birth to death, generation after generation.
Small clip about the people around Mayak, a 1950's nuclear fuel reprocessing plant on the River Techa, Russia.
It "leaked". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR1wo5s3Ua4 [youtube.com]
Summary (Score:2)
Seems a bit like a feel-good list to me though, given the (surprisingly low) impact. A few hundred thousand people? That's not a lot compared to the impact of pollution by greenhouse-gases, mostly by industrial nations.
</treehugginghippy>
Really (Score:2)
Then the pollution must be really small, because for $15,000, how much soil can you dig up, clean/store in a bunker, pay people to do it.
I wonder. 1 m3? 2?
Re: (Score:2)
100 guys with shovels and wheelbarrows working for 500 hours at $2/hour = $10000. The same sort of thinking could probably 'dispose' of the dirt for the remaining $5000.
Re: (Score:2)
I smell something... (Score:2)
So just what are these clowns on about?
More sources for similar info? (Score:2)
And here is where all the money for it is.... (Score:2)
Now what sort of argument would terrorist come up with, so to promote a following and motivate some to self destruct in performing acts of terrorism, that would be effective against genuine efforts to improve the livings conditions the six billion + people of the world, including them?
Know anyone who wants to stop a good them for themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
They still got Chernobyl wrong (Score:4, Informative)
Really? I don't think the word "norm" means what they think it means...
I'm not trying to say the Chernobyl accident wasn't a very bad accident or that the area isn't heavily polluted. It just gets a bit tiresome to see the same mistakes over and over again. For a list which focuses on the polluted status of various regions you would have expected to see he studies that have been done on how birds have been hard hit by the contamination, instead you get pictures of mentally handicapped children being abandoned, which is of course more a consequence of the failure to provide care for them than it is a result of the accident.
There are problems in the Chernobyl area, but this article fails quite badly at describing them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Has anyone actually been to any of these sites (Score:2, Interesting)
I wondered have any other slashdot readers had the misfortune of actually going to any of these places?
I myself live and work in Azerbaijan and have driven through Sumgayit [blacksmithinstitute.org]. It's a horrific industrial wasteland. We spent 30+ minutes driving at highway speed through abandoned factory complexes. Our driver even pointed out the chlorine processing plant, and inforrmed us that if you walk on the ground around the plant puddles of mercury form in the holes left by your boot prints.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Monsanto [chemicalin...chives.org] would be the guilty party there and they are trying to gain control of our food supply [greenpeace.org]. Plenty more info out there, including old Slashdot articles with info on the evil moves of Monsanto. If Slashdotters do some research on this they will even discover that the government has helped Monsanto with numerous coverups and power plays. Do we really want to trust Monsanto with our food supply?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You completely missed the part in the book that dealt with how it's stupid to mess with the guy with the thousands upon thousands of nukes aimed in your direction.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to be poor in order to work. Money and income is not the only motivation for work. Read Maslow. You can volunteer out of interest for the community even if you are rich.
Re: (Score:2)
They have — even if the oil and gas are the only drivers of the boom. That's my point — they (Russian government) are rich, but they wouldn't spend the $15K on cleaning up a particularly messy site.
Well, it can not possibly cost less $1000, because that, roughly, is the price of airfare between their bases an