6 ms·

Lead poisoning in Australian mining towns is a surprisingly contentious issue. Town mayors usually try to cover up and deny any evidence of lead poisoning, beca

by cjs_ac 2y ago

Lead poisoning in Australian mining towns is a surprisingly contentious issue. Town mayors usually try to cover up and deny any evidence of lead poisoning, because without the mines, there is no town. The broken hill that the town of Broken Hill is named after no longer exists. The mullock heap pictured in the article is all that remains: the entire hill was dug away when the original mine was active. As you can see on OpenStreetMap[0], the slag heap sits right in the middle of the town, with lead-laden dust blowing down into the streets and backyards every time the wind picks up. The other town mentioned in the article is Mount Isa[1]. Mount Isa has both a mine and a smelter, both located immediately to the west of the town. The prevailing winds are westerlies, so again the toxic dust falls on the town. [0] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/-31.9653/141.4597 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/-31.9653/141.4597 [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/-20.7339/139.4831 https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/-20.7339/139.4831

ClumsyPilot 2y ago
> Town mayors usually try to cover up and deny any evidence of lead poisoning After moving to the West from a developing country was surprised to discover that things our politicians do for a big bribe western politicians sometimes do for free.
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  The money just flows through different channels, but that's a funny observation.
  - gwervc 2y ago
    Exactly, corruption is more sophisticated, but it exists and is huge nonetheless. The big difference is that the starting GDP is higher, which allows for a little more to reach normal citizens after corruption is taken into account.
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
      An old friend of mine who was originally from Iran told me something a family member of his said to him, which was basically: "In the west you may not have bribery, but the ability to influence decisions is mostly out of your reach. At least here little people can have some small control over their environment through small bribes." I had never heard bribery pitched that way before, and it's obviously... a garbage... way to run a society. But. In Roman times, decision making, power, etc was in large part done through systems of explicit patronage. We now -- in public at least -- consider patronage to be a corrupt and awful thing, but then having a powerful patron was a sign of virtue and goodness. Having a wealthy famous patron literally made you a better person, "not-guilty" in various crimes, etc. I am not convinced that that ethic has ever really gone away. Just maybe more hidden.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > but the ability to influence decisions is mostly out of your reach. At least here little people can have some small control over their environment through small bribes This is mostly comforting nonsense. The average American has more say, potential and actual, in their government than the average Iranian. (And the average Iranian more than the Saudis.) What in a bribe economy one pays for with cash in a civil society takes effort. The tragedy in American civics is far too many are too poor, tired and/or uneducated to fully engage. And one of these states is preferable to the other. My Indian family used to speak similarly. Yet when they have the chance, they vote against corruption. To the degree India has become less corrupt over the last decade, it's been celebrated by them out of both pride and personal interest.
        darby_nine 2y ago
        > The average American has more say, potential and actual, in their government than the average Iranian Sure, if you know the right people or can buy a lobbyist. Otherwise all you can do is complain to a wall. Even lawsuits don't generally have net positive effects on society—nothing changes, we just do the same things at greater expense. Most of our society is privatized and well out of the reach of democratic output. If you're lucky, the market in question might have some limited competition and you can choose the slightly lesser poison. That's about it.
- cmrdporcupine 2y ago
  That's because the seat of power in the west is not with governments at all, but with business. The gov't ends up being there to keep them happy and avoid conflicts between them. They've mostly stripped themselves of the ability to do anything they could be bribed over.
  - FredPret 2y ago
    I don't know man. The US government spends in a couple of months what the biggest companies are worth in total. According to this [0] Uncle Sam is obligated to spend 6.3T this year. That's 500B per month. Compare to the market cap of mammoth companies [1]. ExxonMobil, UnitedHealth, and Mastercard are all in the top 20 US companies and worth around one month of government spending. How can a whale be beholden to a flea? [0]: https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function [1]: https://companiesmarketcap.com/ https://companiesmarketcap.com/
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
      How much of that is defense? How much is security & policing? A bulk of that spending is to keep the market going, and to protect business interests.
    - tehjoker 2y ago
      The government is designed for rich people from its foundation, it's a cozy revolving door for the elites and functions to repress popular movements. Officials identify with business and owners and can pick up do-nothing or interesting jobs after their government services. US elections are some of the most expensive in the world and politicians rely on donations to win their campaigns. The connections between business and government are a spider web. Business also isn't a set of individual companies, they in fact cooperate on public policy through think tanks such as the chamber of commerce and the business round table. Furthermore, since business controls the commodities and processes that sustain life, business holds a veto over economic policy with "capital strikes". Government could seize these properties, but our left wing is very weak. Think about it another way, why do you assume that elected officials have any obligation to the public when there is essentially no recourse except through elections and elections generally require oodles of money to win?
- nkrisc 2y ago
  Because there lying and cheating for bribes are how politicians make money. Here, lying and cheating are how they keep the job that allows them to make money in other dishonest ways.
recombined 2y ago
Always a pleasure to see we're in a good company. I've had the misfortune of being raised in this place: https://maps.app.goo.gl/aXkHEfX42aNp2yxV9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/aXkHEfX42aNp2yxV9 Combine a large lead smelting plant with one of the world's largest producers of (unenriched) uranium, and a dozen other metals like copper and zinc. Add zero effective environmental regulation on top, and you get us. According to government data, lead concentrations in the top soil are measured in hundreds to several thousands of milligrams per kilogram, depending on location. The norm is low dozens, if I am not mistaken. No blood level studies have been done since the end of the 1980s. Thanks to this link, I at least have a reference point from a relatively transparent and accountable society. All I can say, back when I was in middle to high school, it felt like every other kid was diagnosed with anemia (yours truly included), and skin conditions like atopic dermatitis or recurring abscesses covering half the body were very common. Personally I have never felt like having a sharp mind, but it's difficult to say how much impact lead may have had on this. This is how it typically looks on the ground, if you're interested: https://imgur.com/a/HyT1B5p https://imgur.com/a/HyT1B5p Don't know why I'm writing all this, I guess to let it be known that there are far worse places out there than a couple of small Australian towns (with what to me looks like very clean air).
- yessenzhar 2y ago
  I grew up in this town too in the 90s. It was very common to see everyone outside suddenly start coughing because of sulfur dioxide emissions from the plant.
- grecy 2y ago
  > I guess to let it be known that there are far worse places out there than a couple of small Australian towns (with what to me looks like very clean air). It sounds like the situation in your town was very bad. That neither diminishes nor invalidates a bad situation elsewhere. We should all be striving for better, no matter where we start from.
- oska 2y ago
  Just looking at that location on the map, it struck me how 'continental' it was, i.e. how inland it was. Turns out it's actually pretty near Eurasia's "Pole of inaccessibility", which is basically on the border between Kazakhstan and China [1]. As an Australian, I find our vast hinterland somewhat intimidating and haven't spent much time there. Like most Australians I live on its coastline. I also feel somewhat intimidated by Eurasia's vast inner continent, but also curious about it too. Would love to visit Kazakhstan sometime, but maybe not your hometown. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Eurasia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Eurasi...
jeffbee 2y ago
"Giant toxic slag heap in the middle of town" is probably pretty common. Was definitely a thing in El Paso, Texas, where I lived in the 1980s. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-east-chicago-there-was-smeltertown https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-east-chicago-there-was-sm...
teruakohatu 2y ago
You weren't kidding, that one mine has polluted a significant percentage of the entire earths surface [1]: > "The idea that Amundsen and Scott were traveling over snow that clearly was contaminated by lead from smelting and mining in Australia, and that lead pollution at that time was nearly as high as any time ever since, is surprising to say the least." > The similar timing and magnitude of changes in lead deposition across Antarctica, as well as the characteristic isotopic signature of Broken Hill lead found throughout the continent, suggest that this single emission source in southern Australia was responsible for the introduction of lead pollution into Antarctica at the end of the 19th century and remains a significant source today, the authors report. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20140808070623/http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/lead-pollution-beat-explorers-to-south-pole-persists-today/#.U96NN_ldX2f https://web.archive.org/web/20140808070623/http://www.nasa.g...
Reason077 2y ago
Seems crazy that you’d build a town so close to the mine (or a smelter so close to a town). It’s not as if Australia is short on space for building things! Perhaps it should be a condition of operating a lucrative mining site that you build/subsidise worker’s accommodation at a reasonable enough distance to be free from contamination.
- ern 2y ago
  As I understand it, much mining is done in Australia through FIFO (fly-in-fly-out) nowadays. It greatly reduces the need for infrastructure, boom-bust towns and issues like these.

by cjs_ac 2y ago

ClumsyPilot 2y ago

> Town mayors usually try to cover up and deny any evidence of lead poisoning After moving to the West from a developing country was surprised to discover that things our politicians do for a big bribe western politicians sometimes do for free.

soulofmischief 2y ago
The money just flows through different channels, but that's a funny observation.
- gwervc 2y ago
  Exactly, corruption is more sophisticated, but it exists and is huge nonetheless. The big difference is that the starting GDP is higher, which allows for a little more to reach normal citizens after corruption is taken into account.
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    An old friend of mine who was originally from Iran told me something a family member of his said to him, which was basically: "In the west you may not have bribery, but the ability to influence decisions is mostly out of your reach. At least here little people can have some small control over their environment through small bribes." I had never heard bribery pitched that way before, and it's obviously... a garbage... way to run a society. But. In Roman times, decision making, power, etc was in large part done through systems of explicit patronage. We now -- in public at least -- consider patronage to be a corrupt and awful thing, but then having a powerful patron was a sign of virtue and goodness. Having a wealthy famous patron literally made you a better person, "not-guilty" in various crimes, etc. I am not convinced that that ethic has ever really gone away. Just maybe more hidden.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > but the ability to influence decisions is mostly out of your reach. At least here little people can have some small control over their environment through small bribes This is mostly comforting nonsense. The average American has more say, potential and actual, in their government than the average Iranian. (And the average Iranian more than the Saudis.) What in a bribe economy one pays for with cash in a civil society takes effort. The tragedy in American civics is far too many are too poor, tired and/or uneducated to fully engage. And one of these states is preferable to the other. My Indian family used to speak similarly. Yet when they have the chance, they vote against corruption. To the degree India has become less corrupt over the last decade, it's been celebrated by them out of both pride and personal interest.
      - darby_nine 2y ago
        > The average American has more say, potential and actual, in their government than the average Iranian Sure, if you know the right people or can buy a lobbyist. Otherwise all you can do is complain to a wall. Even lawsuits don't generally have net positive effects on society—nothing changes, we just do the same things at greater expense. Most of our society is privatized and well out of the reach of democratic output. If you're lucky, the market in question might have some limited competition and you can choose the slightly lesser poison. That's about it.
cmrdporcupine 2y ago
That's because the seat of power in the west is not with governments at all, but with business. The gov't ends up being there to keep them happy and avoid conflicts between them. They've mostly stripped themselves of the ability to do anything they could be bribed over.
- FredPret 2y ago
  I don't know man. The US government spends in a couple of months what the biggest companies are worth in total. According to this [0] Uncle Sam is obligated to spend 6.3T this year. That's 500B per month. Compare to the market cap of mammoth companies [1]. ExxonMobil, UnitedHealth, and Mastercard are all in the top 20 US companies and worth around one month of government spending. How can a whale be beholden to a flea? [0]: https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function [1]: https://companiesmarketcap.com/ https://companiesmarketcap.com/
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    How much of that is defense? How much is security & policing? A bulk of that spending is to keep the market going, and to protect business interests.
  - tehjoker 2y ago
    The government is designed for rich people from its foundation, it's a cozy revolving door for the elites and functions to repress popular movements. Officials identify with business and owners and can pick up do-nothing or interesting jobs after their government services. US elections are some of the most expensive in the world and politicians rely on donations to win their campaigns. The connections between business and government are a spider web. Business also isn't a set of individual companies, they in fact cooperate on public policy through think tanks such as the chamber of commerce and the business round table. Furthermore, since business controls the commodities and processes that sustain life, business holds a veto over economic policy with "capital strikes". Government could seize these properties, but our left wing is very weak. Think about it another way, why do you assume that elected officials have any obligation to the public when there is essentially no recourse except through elections and elections generally require oodles of money to win?
nkrisc 2y ago
Because there lying and cheating for bribes are how politicians make money. Here, lying and cheating are how they keep the job that allows them to make money in other dishonest ways.

recombined 2y ago

Always a pleasure to see we're in a good company. I've had the misfortune of being raised in this place: https://maps.app.goo.gl/aXkHEfX42aNp2yxV9 https://maps.app.goo.gl/aXkHEfX42aNp2yxV9 Combine a large lead smelting plant with one of the world's largest producers of (unenriched) uranium, and a dozen other metals like copper and zinc. Add zero effective environmental regulation on top, and you get us. According to government data, lead concentrations in the top soil are measured in hundreds to several thousands of milligrams per kilogram, depending on location. The norm is low dozens, if I am not mistaken. No blood level studies have been done since the end of the 1980s. Thanks to this link, I at least have a reference point from a relatively transparent and accountable society. All I can say, back when I was in middle to high school, it felt like every other kid was diagnosed with anemia (yours truly included), and skin conditions like atopic dermatitis or recurring abscesses covering half the body were very common. Personally I have never felt like having a sharp mind, but it's difficult to say how much impact lead may have had on this. This is how it typically looks on the ground, if you're interested: https://imgur.com/a/HyT1B5p https://imgur.com/a/HyT1B5p Don't know why I'm writing all this, I guess to let it be known that there are far worse places out there than a couple of small Australian towns (with what to me looks like very clean air).

yessenzhar 2y ago
I grew up in this town too in the 90s. It was very common to see everyone outside suddenly start coughing because of sulfur dioxide emissions from the plant.
grecy 2y ago
> I guess to let it be known that there are far worse places out there than a couple of small Australian towns (with what to me looks like very clean air). It sounds like the situation in your town was very bad. That neither diminishes nor invalidates a bad situation elsewhere. We should all be striving for better, no matter where we start from.
oska 2y ago
Just looking at that location on the map, it struck me how 'continental' it was, i.e. how inland it was. Turns out it's actually pretty near Eurasia's "Pole of inaccessibility", which is basically on the border between Kazakhstan and China [1]. As an Australian, I find our vast hinterland somewhat intimidating and haven't spent much time there. Like most Australians I live on its coastline. I also feel somewhat intimidated by Eurasia's vast inner continent, but also curious about it too. Would love to visit Kazakhstan sometime, but maybe not your hometown. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Eurasia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pole_of_inaccessibility#Eurasi...

jeffbee 2y ago

"Giant toxic slag heap in the middle of town" is probably pretty common. Was definitely a thing in El Paso, Texas, where I lived in the 1980s. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-east-chicago-there-was-smeltertown https://www.nrdc.org/stories/flint-east-chicago-there-was-sm...

teruakohatu 2y ago

You weren't kidding, that one mine has polluted a significant percentage of the entire earths surface [1]: > "The idea that Amundsen and Scott were traveling over snow that clearly was contaminated by lead from smelting and mining in Australia, and that lead pollution at that time was nearly as high as any time ever since, is surprising to say the least." > The similar timing and magnitude of changes in lead deposition across Antarctica, as well as the characteristic isotopic signature of Broken Hill lead found throughout the continent, suggest that this single emission source in southern Australia was responsible for the introduction of lead pollution into Antarctica at the end of the 19th century and remains a significant source today, the authors report. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20140808070623/http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard/lead-pollution-beat-explorers-to-south-pole-persists-today/#.U96NN_ldX2f https://web.archive.org/web/20140808070623/http://www.nasa.g...

Reason077 2y ago

Seems crazy that you’d build a town so close to the mine (or a smelter so close to a town). It’s not as if Australia is short on space for building things! Perhaps it should be a condition of operating a lucrative mining site that you build/subsidise worker’s accommodation at a reasonable enough distance to be free from contamination.

ern 2y ago
As I understand it, much mining is done in Australia through FIFO (fly-in-fly-out) nowadays. It greatly reduces the need for infrastructure, boom-bust towns and issues like these.