6 ms·

They just dump human waste into the water. I can't even watch people eat shellfish. "One hundred and six wastewater treatment plants, discharging as much as 9

They just dump human waste into the water. I can't even watch people eat shellfish. "One hundred and six wastewater treatment plants, discharging as much as 97,000 pounds of chemicals each year, are located around Puget Sound." https://news.vice.com/article/seattle-area-salmon-are-loaded-with-anti-depressants-and-other-drugs-thanks-to-human-waste https://news.vice.com/article/seattle-area-salmon-are-loaded...

darpa_escapee 8y ago
This is the case pretty much anywhere near a coastline. I refuse to eat locally caught seafood.
- throwaway2019 8y ago
  it’s somebodies “local coastline” elsewhere too so that might not help you
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    Not all fishing is coastal.
- gwbas1c 8y ago
  American-caught seafood has the strictest regulations in the world; and is the safest.
  - riffraff 8y ago
    I don't know if this is true or not but what do you base this opinion on?
  - Camillo 8y ago
    I very much doubt it. For example, American restaurants happily serve this crap, passing it off as "tuna": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escolar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escolar
    - yesenadam 8y ago
      Human calls a species 'crap' for not being good to kill and eat large quantities of... That attitude seems to me part of the problem.
- rayiner 8y ago
  :-/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa
  - darpa_escapee 8y ago
    :-/ The government recommends not to eat what is caught here. Thanks for the high quality post, though.
jonknee 8y ago
To be fair, the Sound has hundreds of trillions of pounds of water. 97,000 pounds of anything isn't going to make a big difference. But it would be awesome if we could stop polluting it.
- willj 8y ago
  97,000 pounds of dioxin would kill lots of people. Some compounds are unbelievably toxic.
  - jonknee 8y ago
    These are all compounds that have already gone through people's system. It's bad, but not the end of the world.
dluan 8y ago
They don't dump it in the water. They dump it in the forests. In WA specifically, "sewage" is processed for as many contaminants as possible. Then, they put it in trucks and drive into the Cascades and spray it in the forests. They call it bioremediation - but it seeps into the groundwater, which then goes to streams. Where do all the streams end up? Puget sound. If you wander up past the locked gates of the timber roads near Snoqualmie or Snohomish, you'll find flame retardants, opioids, caffeine, fluorocarbons, and whatever other toxins that ultimately never gets absorbed by the forests. By the way, this practice of using biosolids in agriculture or forests is very politically charged because there's a lot of money tied up with this industry and the people who wound up writing the bulk of the EPA regulation around this industry. Every time you hear of an E. coli outbreak in some vegetable, it's because of this. This is something I wish more people knew about, or at least stop to consider where their waste ends up.
- dekhn 8y ago
  Hmm. When you hear about E. coli outbreaks in vegetables, it's traced back to fecal contamination on the worker's or processing equipment's working surfaces. I looked to find any sources with high quality scientific evidence showing accumulation of toxic waste in timber roads in WA. I am an open minded scientist, if you post high quality work I'll read it and change my mind.
  - dluan 8y ago
    "There are three general methods for applying biosolids to forests: 1) spray irrigation with either a set system or a traveling gun, 2) spray application by an application vehicle with a spray cannon, and 3) application by a throw-spreader or manure-type spreader. In the Pacific Northwest, the most common methods for forest applications are the throw-spreader or a vehicle-mounted cannon. Table 7.7 lists these application methods, their range, relative costs, advantages and disadvantages, and their suitability for biosolids of different solids contents." https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/9380.pdf https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/9380.pdf It was the top item of the first google search for "biosolids washington forest". Here's pictures if you're interested. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/forest_fert_presentation_feb2011_final.pdf https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resour... Here's another article from 20 years ago about the practice: http://thewatchers.us/wef/PacNW.pdf http://thewatchers.us/wef/PacNW.pdf

darpa_escapee 8y ago

This is the case pretty much anywhere near a coastline. I refuse to eat locally caught seafood.

throwaway2019 8y ago
it’s somebodies “local coastline” elsewhere too so that might not help you
- EpicEng 8y ago
  Not all fishing is coastal.
gwbas1c 8y ago
American-caught seafood has the strictest regulations in the world; and is the safest.
- riffraff 8y ago
  I don't know if this is true or not but what do you base this opinion on?
- Camillo 8y ago
  I very much doubt it. For example, American restaurants happily serve this crap, passing it off as "tuna": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escolar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escolar
  - yesenadam 8y ago
    Human calls a species 'crap' for not being good to kill and eat large quantities of... That attitude seems to me part of the problem.
rayiner 8y ago
:-/ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthorexia_nervosa
- darpa_escapee 8y ago
  :-/ The government recommends not to eat what is caught here. Thanks for the high quality post, though.

jonknee 8y ago

To be fair, the Sound has hundreds of trillions of pounds of water. 97,000 pounds of anything isn't going to make a big difference. But it would be awesome if we could stop polluting it.

willj 8y ago
97,000 pounds of dioxin would kill lots of people. Some compounds are unbelievably toxic.
- jonknee 8y ago
  These are all compounds that have already gone through people's system. It's bad, but not the end of the world.

dluan 8y ago

They don't dump it in the water. They dump it in the forests. In WA specifically, "sewage" is processed for as many contaminants as possible. Then, they put it in trucks and drive into the Cascades and spray it in the forests. They call it bioremediation - but it seeps into the groundwater, which then goes to streams. Where do all the streams end up? Puget sound. If you wander up past the locked gates of the timber roads near Snoqualmie or Snohomish, you'll find flame retardants, opioids, caffeine, fluorocarbons, and whatever other toxins that ultimately never gets absorbed by the forests. By the way, this practice of using biosolids in agriculture or forests is very politically charged because there's a lot of money tied up with this industry and the people who wound up writing the bulk of the EPA regulation around this industry. Every time you hear of an E. coli outbreak in some vegetable, it's because of this. This is something I wish more people knew about, or at least stop to consider where their waste ends up.

dekhn 8y ago
Hmm. When you hear about E. coli outbreaks in vegetables, it's traced back to fecal contamination on the worker's or processing equipment's working surfaces. I looked to find any sources with high quality scientific evidence showing accumulation of toxic waste in timber roads in WA. I am an open minded scientist, if you post high quality work I'll read it and change my mind.
- dluan 8y ago
  "There are three general methods for applying biosolids to forests: 1) spray irrigation with either a set system or a traveling gun, 2) spray application by an application vehicle with a spray cannon, and 3) application by a throw-spreader or manure-type spreader. In the Pacific Northwest, the most common methods for forest applications are the throw-spreader or a vehicle-mounted cannon. Table 7.7 lists these application methods, their range, relative costs, advantages and disadvantages, and their suitability for biosolids of different solids contents." https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/9380.pdf https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/9380.pdf It was the top item of the first google search for "biosolids washington forest". Here's pictures if you're interested. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/forest_fert_presentation_feb2011_final.pdf https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resour... Here's another article from 20 years ago about the practice: http://thewatchers.us/wef/PacNW.pdf http://thewatchers.us/wef/PacNW.pdf