Texas officials ignore dioxin spread in Houston waterways

Somerville · May 7, 2018

Just another example of corporate money causing those who are supposed to help their citizens, to ignore the harm caused by a failure to regulate polluters. It's a long article, which means that some won't bother to read it while arguing that it's nothing more than academic types and socialists trying to scare people.

Texas officials ignore dioxin spread in Houston waterways

An agreement announced last month has cleared the way for the San Jacinto Waste Pits to finally be cleaned up. But dioxin damage already has spread far beyond the waste pits, the Houston Chronicle and The Associated Press found.

More than 30 hotspots — small sites where dioxin has settled — have been located in sediments along the river, the Houston Ship Channel and into Galveston Bay, according to University of Houston research conducted from 2001 to 2011 and pieced together by the news organizations.

Details about the hotspots have not been made public by Texas environmental regulators, who used more than $5 million in federal money to pay for the research. In 2012, they ended a fact-finding committee that oversaw the project and had proposed new standards for dioxin and PCBs that could have been costly to corporate polluters.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality refused to release the full results of the studies that identified the sources of dioxin and PCBs, even to academic researchers, Harris County officials and lawyers who later sued companies over environmental damage. The research funding ended in 2011, leaving unanswered questions about whether toxic damage spread even farther during hurricanes Ike and Harvey.

Please note that Texas is "still working" on a response to the poisoning, SIX years after the study was completed

In a statement, the agency said it's still working on "a document summarizing the source characterization of dioxin loads in the Houston Ship Channel/Upper Galveston Bay system."

The state's approach to dioxin follows the same pattern the Chronicle and AP previously identified in an investigation into air and water pollution releases from Hurricane Harvey. The news organizations found that state and federal regulators did little in response to massive releases of toxic pollution reported during and after Harvey's torrential rains.

Similarly, Texas regulators have not followed up on the dioxin research with additional testing to see if wells, parks or property also are contaminated by the pollutants that formed the toxic hotspots.

Phys251 · May 7, 2018

Somerville said:
Just another example of corporate money causing those who are supposed to help their citizens, to ignore the harm caused by a failure to regulate polluters. It's a long article, which means that some won't bother to read it while arguing that it's nothing more than academic types and socialists trying to scare people.

Please note that Texas is "still working" on a response to the poisoning, SIX years after the study was completed

Jesus. Dioxins are no joke.

Risky Thicket · May 7, 2018

[FONT=RobotoRegular, Arial, sans-serif]The committee formed by state regulators to study dioxin included representatives of two companies ultimately found to be major contamination sources: Shell Chemical and OxyVinyls, a subsidiary of Occidental Chemical.

[/FONT]

[FONT=RobotoRegular, Arial, sans-serif]And much of this occurred or continued during Rick Perry's time as governor. Perry really loves Texans, huh?

I'm sorry to say that little will come of the massive environmental crimes and public health hazards committed. Shell has their man in Washington as the Sec. of Energy. [/FONT]

itsforthekids · May 7, 2018

Somerville said:
Just another example of corporate money causing those who are supposed to help their citizens, to ignore the harm caused by a failure to regulate polluters. It's a long article, which means that some won't bother to read it while arguing that it's nothing more than academic types and socialists trying to scare people.

Please note that Texas is "still working" on a response to the poisoning, SIX years after the study was completed

Maybe if we give the EPA a larger budget...

longview · May 8, 2018

It is rather interesting how the Chronicle can torque a story.
The area in question has been known to be polluted for several decades,
yet the Chronicle presents this as newly discovered information.
https://tpwd.texas.gov/regulations/...ulations/fish-consumption-bans-and-advisories
They also mentioned that officials did nothing about it, there is a reason we have superfund sites,
there is not really much that can be done, they fence off the area and don't let people live there.
Also people have known for decades to not eat fish from those areas, since at least the 70's at least.

Somerville · May 8, 2018

longview said:
It is rather interesting how the Chronicle can torque a story.
The area in question has been known to be polluted for several decades,
yet the Chronicle presents this as newly discovered information.
https://tpwd.texas.gov/regulations/...ulations/fish-consumption-bans-and-advisories
They also mentioned that officials did nothing about it, there is a reason we have superfund sites,
there is not really much that can be done, they fence off the area and don't let people live there.
Also people have known for decades to not eat fish from those areas, since at least the 70's at least.

Obviously, you didn't bother to read the Chronicle's article. If you had you would have seen the problem caused by Harvey's flooding, at least half of one super-fund site is now underwater, owing to surface erosion.

I believe the Chronicle article was more focused on the failure of the state government to do anything in the past 6 years since the report was released and not how on long the toxic sites have been identified as dangerous.

Somerville · May 8, 2018

itsforthekids said:
Maybe if we give the EPA a larger budget...

Maybe the companies which created the pollution should be paying for the cleanup. Just a thought

itsforthekids · May 8, 2018

Somerville said:
Maybe the companies which created the pollution should be paying for the cleanup. Just a thought

I agree, but why does this happen in the first place when a bloated bureaucracy with an $8 BILLION DOLLAR annual budget is the watch dog. Perhaps if they focused a little more on the big things instead of breaking home owners balls.

Somerville · May 8, 2018

itsforthekids said:
I agree, but why does this happen in the first place when a bloated bureaucracy with an $8 BILLION DOLLAR annual budget is the watch dog. Perhaps if they focused a little more on the big things instead of breaking home owners balls.

The ever so small fact that the companies which created the pollution have donated millions to various politicians over the year might have more to do with the present problem than your favoured target of government employees. That was kinda the point I made in the OP but evidently some people prefer flailing away at "a bloated bureaucracy" instead of looking at the real world.

longview · May 9, 2018

Somerville said:
Obviously, you didn't bother to read the Chronicle's article. If you had you would have seen the problem caused by Harvey's flooding, at least half of one super-fund site is now underwater, owing to surface erosion.

I believe the Chronicle article was more focused on the failure of the state government to do anything in the past 6 years since the report was released and not how on long the toxic sites have been identified as dangerous.

The article is misleading because the site has been know for decades.

Somerville · May 9, 2018

longview said:
The article is misleading because the site has been know for decades.

It seems to me that you are the one who is misleading, trying to anyway, but not doing a very good job at it.

Fourth paragraph in the article, contradicts your statement about a single site being known in advance of the Harvey flooding.

More than 30 hotspots — small sites where dioxin has settled — have been located in sediments along the river, the Houston Ship Channel and into Galveston Bay, according to University of Houston research conducted from 2001 to 2011 and pieced together by the news organizations.

Fifth paragraph shows the apparent lack of concern in state government officials. Officials charged with protecting the public but who seem to prefer corporate cash over public health.

The affected areas are alongside parks and residential neighborhoods with thousands of homes. But the residents' wells or yards have not been tested by state health officials.

Sixth paragraph continues the reveal. If a resident doesn't know about potential contamination of well water, why would they have it tested?

Details about the hotspots have not been made public by Texas environmental regulators, who used more than $5 million in federal money to pay for the research. In 2012, they ended a fact-finding committee that oversaw the project and had proposed new standards for dioxin and PCBs that could have been costly to corporate polluters.

Why is the state of Texas refusing to release the information about contamination in the Houston area?

Denial of science has become the standing position of far too many on the right. It ain't a good way forward but for some reason, conservatives think that corporate overlords and oligarchs will nevertheless always do the 'right thing' when it comes to protecting the public. History tells the rational otherwise.

longview · May 9, 2018

Somerville said:
It seems to me that you are the one who is misleading, trying to anyway, but not doing a very good job at it.

Fourth paragraph in the article, contradicts your statement about a single site being known in advance of the Harvey flooding.

Fifth paragraph shows the apparent lack of concern in state government officials. Officials charged with protecting the public but who seem to prefer corporate cash over public health.

Sixth paragraph continues the reveal. If a resident doesn't know about potential contamination of well water, why would they have it tested?

Why is the state of Texas refusing to release the information about contamination in the Houston area?

Denial of science has become the standing position of far too many on the right. It ain't a good way forward but for some reason, conservatives think that corporate overlords and oligarchs will nevertheless always do the 'right thing' when it comes to protecting the public. History tells the rational otherwise.

None of this changes the fact that the contamination of that area has been known for decades.
The Studies by UH were done with the Galveston Bay estuary group, and the findings were published, resulting
in a broadening of the fish consumption ban following the dredging of the Houston ship channel.
https://www.egr.uh.edu/news/200211/32-million-project-document-dioxin-levels-houston-ship-channel
look way back in 2002 the Texas Natural Resource and Conservation Commission funded a $3.2 million grant
to study this issue, that sure doesn't sound like ,Texas officials ignoring the issue.

Lovebug · May 9, 2018

Risky Thicket said:
[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=RobotoRegular, Arial, sans-serif]And much of this occurred or continued during Rick Perry's time as governor. Perry really loves Texans, huh?

I'm sorry to say that little will come of the massive environmental crimes and public health hazards committed. Shell has their man in Washington as the Sec. of Energy. [/FONT]

The research funding ended in 2011

and a few years have passed since. No?

Lovebug · May 9, 2018

longview said:
None of this changes the fact that the contamination of that area has been known for decades.
The Studies by UH were done with the Galveston Bay estuary group, and the findings were published, resulting
in a broadening of the fish consumption ban following the dredging of the Houston ship channel.
https://www.egr.uh.edu/news/200211/32-million-project-document-dioxin-levels-houston-ship-channel
look way back in 2002 the Texas Natural Resource and Conservation Commission funded a $3.2 million grant
to study this issue, that sure doesn't sound like ,Texas officials ignoring the issue.

OTOH, if the issue is a growing concern, more should be done about it, and soon.

Texas officials ignore dioxin spread in Houston waterways

Somerville

Phys251

Purge evil with Justice

Risky Thicket

Sewer Rat

itsforthekids

longview

Somerville

Somerville

itsforthekids

Somerville

longview

Somerville

longview

Lovebug

Be humble and kind

Lovebug

Be humble and kind