8 ms·
It’s sickening how people though it’s totally ok to dump tens of thousands of toxic waste into the ocean, I really hope they get prosecuted for that.
by usaphp 5y ago
It’s sickening how people though it’s totally ok to dump tens of thousands of toxic waste into the ocean, I really hope they get prosecuted for that.
- pomian 5y agoAnd this is in a country that has learned it's lessons, and gradually, actually cares. Think of all the other places in the world with sites like this.
- paulmd 5y agoWe haven’t learned our lesson though. We went on and kept doing the same thing with Teflon, PFAS/firefighting foams, and endocrine-disrupting plasticizers like BPA. And it’s still not like we’ve learned any lesson from that, either. They don’t have to prove what they’re replacing it with is safe, or presumptively handle it like it’s unsafe. In 50 years we will find out that the next PFOA-like or BPA-like compound does the same thing, because it was selected for the same properties that posed the problems in humans in the first place. Until you flip the model on its head and require companies to establish safe handling protocols, biological limits, and appropriate disposal methods in advance, it’s just going to keep happening. But god forbid we tell industry “no”.
- brettermeier 5y agoAmerica learned its lesson and cares now? Just LOOOOL
- throwaway0a5e 5y agoTry dumping toxic waste in the environment in 2021 and see where that gets you. The lesson has mostly been learned.
- pvaldes 5y ago> Try dumping toxic waste in the environment in 2021 and see where that gets you. Directly to the second place in the "Most polluting countries" award, probably.
- yummypaint 5y agoDumping coal ash by deliberately storing it improperly and waiting for a natural disaster is still a common practice. We are dealing with this plus genx dumping in north carolina. No person actually responsible will be punished. Even if a corporate citizen is held liable, they will just declare bankruptcy and leave taxpayers with the bill as usual.
- sschueller 5y agoSadly they wont be prosecuted as most of them will be dead from age. Same goes for what Monsanto has done and others are doing right now knowingly poisoning future generations.
- fighterpilot 5y agoTragedy of the commons :(
- driverdan 5y agoProsecuted for what? Not only was it legal back then it was generally recognized as the best method of disposal. Plus as others have pointed out nearly everyone involved is dead by now.
- rasz 5y agoWait till you learn where trash was going up to 1992 https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/29/nyregion/ocean-dumping-ending-but-not-problems-new-york-can-t-ship-bury-burn-its-sludge.html https://www.nytimes.com/1992/06/29/nyregion/ocean-dumping-en...
- techrat 5y agoConsidering DDT was banned in 1972... any suits who were alive during its production and would be behind the decision to dump all of this stuff out into the sea, assuming a median age of 40, would be 89 years old today. TLDR: Those responsible are probably all dead now.
- usaphp 5y ago"In December 2000, the Montrose Chemical Corporation of California and three other corporations settled their lawsuits for a collective $73 million."
- techrat 5y agoCorporations vs the people who actually made the decision.
- KMag 5y ago> Considering DDT was banned in 1972... DDT was not banned in the US in 1972. The use of DDT in agricultural applications was banned in the US in 1972. As far as I know, it's still legal to manufacture and still legal to use for mosquito control.
- techrat 5y agoCDC says it's outright banned. https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/DDT_FactSheet.html https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/DDT_FactSheet.html > The United States banned the use of DDT in 1972, but some countries still use the chemical. DDT has also been used in the past for the treatment of lice. It is still in use outside the United States for the control of mosquitoes that spread malaria. EPA says its use was discontinued (read: cancelled) https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-brief-history-and-status https://www.epa.gov/ingredients-used-pesticide-products/ddt-... > In 1972, EPA issued a cancellation order for DDT based on its adverse environmental effects, such as those to wildlife, as well as its potential human health risks.
- 5y ago
- vosper 5y agoIt’s not just waste barrels. The same sort of thing happens with oil tankers when the front falls off https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
- DiNovi 5y agoThis is how industrial capitalism is profitable: by socializing the cost of its pollution. If chemical companies had to pay for their damage they wouldn’t exist
- fighterpilot 5y agoChemical companies would still exist, they would just be less profitable and their produce would be more expensive if the social costs were fully internalized (as they should be and currently aren't).
- thereisnospork 5y agoYou say that like ridding the continent of malaria was a bad thing. Lots of people owe their lives to DDT.
- DiNovi 5y agoIs the mass amount of pollution that will infect animals through our food chain and lead to many animals and humans lives being stunted for centuries worth it? Just because a chemical is a solution to a problem doesnt absolve it from the numerous other problems it creates for centuries after
- DuskStar 5y agoYou say that like socialized industries haven't had just as large of disasters, or that on net DDT has been bad for the US/world. Everything is a tradeoff - how many kids with malaria is a bald eagle worth?
- throwawayfrauds 5y agoWell, there are less than 500,000 bald eagles, and approximately 2 billion kids, so 4,000 kids per bald eagle?
- porknubbins 5y agoMalaria hasn’t been endemic here for probably 100 years. We poisoned eagles because it was cheap and legal to dump into the ocean. How is there a tradeoff?