There must have been a huge, possibly criminal, conspiracy to cover this up for so long, right?
56 square miles? 27,000+ barrels? It stopped being dumped there in 1972 but nobody knew where it was? WTF?
This will take years and years to clean up.
56 square miles is a square area 5 miles on a side. Or a rectangle 4 miles by 14. Not large even by the scale of the water between LA & Catalina.
Back when it was legal, ships and industries of all sorts would simply drive out aways to sea and tip the stuff over the side. No need to know where or keep records of what or how much. And no point in driving any farther out than minimally necessary; every minute you’re out there you’re costing the company money. It’s the same mindset that folks use today dropping a banana peel in a trash can. Once out of sight it has ceased to exist.
There is almost certainly just such an informal dump offshore of every harbor city in the world. And likewise in the Great Lakes. Each containing gosh knows how much of gosh knows what spread around who knows where.
At least in the USA we stopped adding to ours 50 years ago. I’d not be surprised to learn that it’s still going on 100% full speed in much of Asia and Africa. But now with 21st century commercial volumes.
Will this be difficult to clean up? Sure. Can they actually clean up more than a token fraction of it? Darn good question, but probably not. Will any real effort be made? Even better question.
I don’t mean to make light of this. Our prior selves were far more environmentally reckless and shortsighted than we like to think we are today. And we in turn are far more reckless and shortsighted than our 2- or 4-generation descendants will be. Assuming they survive our collective environmental depredations at all.
But my emotional reaction is more like “Well duh. The only surprising thing is that it was found this particular week.” than “WTF? ZOMG? Inconceivable!!/!1”
A square 5 miles on a side is 25 square miles, isn’t it? A 56 square mile square would be just under 7.5 miles on a side.
“The solution to pollution is dilution.” That has been the industry working model for years.
What makes anyone think that this is likely or even possible to clean up? We are talking about 55 gallon steel drums 3000 feet down in the ocean. The ones that aren’t leaking all ready are certainly going to bust open once anyone attempts to move them. So instead of cleaning it up they would be stirring it up and make the situation much worse.
The issue will fall off of the front page and nothing, or very little, beyond monitoring will be done. Because probably nothing can be done.
Do’h! Thank you!
I would think pouring concrete over the unbroken barrels may be the best solution. Even then, the weight might rupture the barrels.
So somebody calculate the amount of seawater in a square 7.5 miles per side, 3000 feet deep.
Then how many 55-gallon barrels would that seawater fill, and compare it to the 25,000 barrels that are already down there. I suspect that Dallas_jones comment that “The solution to pollution is dilution.” still applies here. I’d certainly want to see evidence that any clean-up attempts would not have a worse effect than just leaving it alone.
Before it becomes diluted, it will kill anything nearby. Like a drop of ink in water, it takes a wile to spread out, and things nearby will be dyed blue.
If I remember correctly, the dumping of DDT in the Pacific was at least part of the reason the island fox was near extinction. Bald eagles on the Channel Islands ate contaminated fish and died out. Then golden eagles moved in and preyed on the foxes.
This is why the free market is a good thing. Government regulation will just mire us in red tape and make things worse.
And since sarcasm isn’t conveyed well in this format - this is sarcasm.