Post by: cleanair on 22/12/2021 09:40:22
Quote
🇺🇳 UN envoy to Somalia: ‘Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury.’ Much of it can be traced back to European 🏥 hospitals and factories.
Some of the waste such as hexachlorobenzene (HCB) is denied for processing in Europe and is therefor dumped in Somalia’s oceans. Locals report that German and Danish shipping companies recently dumped 60,000 barrels of HCB from Australia.
One gram of HCB is enough to contaminate one billion gallons (over 3 billion litres) of water.
A recent study (2019) by Royal Society of Chemistry showed that Humpback whales are getting sick by HCB contamination, causing a variety of health effects, DNA damage and cancer. HCB dominates the contaminant profiles in whales.
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2019/ra/c9ra05352b
whale-hcb-pollution-335w.png (14.31 kB . 335x189 - viewed 6165 times)Another example: Off the coast of Los Angeles, as many as half a million barrels of the potent and highly toxic insecticide DDT are scattered across the ocean floor, waiting to be released into the water. This was discovered a few years ago by a Los Angeles Times investigation. DDT has already been found in Southern California 🐬 dolphins and a recent study linked DDT to an aggressive cancer in 🦭 sea lions.
https://www.latimes.com/projects/la-coast-ddt-dumping-ground/
Upon further research I discovered that the scale of the dumping of waste is much bigger than many people may expect.
(2021) Scientists: “there are massive chemical dumps in the ocean we know almost nothing about”
Industrial companies have used the ocean as a dumping ground for toxic waste. Hazardous industrial chemicals and radioactive waste have been accumulating in the ocean for 150 years.
Industrial companies treat the ocean as a bottomless pit with the idea “out of sight, out of mind”.
Source: https://grist.org/accountability/there-are-massive-chemical-dumps-in-the-gulf-we-know-almost-nothing-about/
A recent study showed that almost 90% of all seabirds have toxic pollution in their bodies. In the past decades, 67 percent of all seabirds have died. Many seabird species could become extinct in the coming decades.
99% of Seabirds Will Have Toxic Pollution In Their Body Within Decades
A recent study found a 67 percent decline in seabird populations between 1950 and 2010. “Essentially seabirds are going extinct,” says Wilcox. “Within decades.”
Sources: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0129342
https://www.ecowatch.com/seabirds-plastic-pollution-2609353767.html
Dozens of death whale babies that washed up in Norway in recent years show that they are already contaminated with deadly levels of toxic chemicals shortly after they are born.
Dead baby orca reveals harmful chemical levels in baby whales
https://www.livescience.com/orca-whales-toxicology.html
Japan recently denied a shipment of whale meat because it was highly contaminated.
Japan refuses Norway’s toxic whale meat
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/world-on-a-plate/2015/mar/23/japan-refuses-norways-toxic-whale-meat
A ticking time bomb is lying beneath the surface of many European seas. It is estimated that German parts of the North Sea and the Baltic Sea alone contain some 1.6 million metric tonnes of relic munitions. These conventional and chemical weapons threaten human life and the marine environment. The weapons, TNT and other explosives slowly decay, releasing harmful substances like cytotoxic, genotoxic, and carcinogenic chemicals into the water.
trash-nuclear-radioactive-ocean-japan.jpg (13.25 kB . 212x129 - viewed 6335 times)After 10 years of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the 🇯🇵 Japanese government has decided on Tuesday, April 13th 2021, to start releasing radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean in 2023. According to a German Marine Scientific Research Institute, once the waters are dumped in the ocean, radioactive materials could spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within 57 days and all oceans within a decade, which could cause a disaster for marine life.
---
According to the following article, industrial companies dump a minimum of 180 million tons of toxic chemical and radioactive waste into the oceans per year. By comparison, American society produces 120 tons of waste per year.
https://earthisland.org/journal/index.php/articles/entry/over_180m_tons_of_toxic_waste_dumped_into_worlds_oceans_rivers_and_lakes_ea
Questions:
1. how much nuclear and chemical waste is dumped in the oceans each year? Are there initiatives to monitor it?
2. what will the effect be for the ocean or the planet when the waste dumping continues at the current rate?
Post by: chiralSPO on 23/12/2021 00:28:30
There used to be a common phrase, "dilution is the solution to pollution." Unfortunately, this is utter delusion (see what I did there?)
to answer your questions:
1. I don't know the magnitude of the scale, but it's huge. There are some initiative to try to monitor it, but it's hard.
2. We've f***ed ourselves pretty well.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 23/12/2021 13:39:01
100% will work.
How to build it, well its not going to be easy. Heat exchange, Radiation, Rays all that can kill any life around while this machine is operational. But, the trials was done in 198x. So, it is very possible to build it again. Many years have passed, technology didnt stand in one place. Why. There only one thing can help gas heat up this much and its a thermal electrical discharge.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 23/12/2021 13:50:19
Post by: Bored chemist on 23/12/2021 13:58:15
Hi. I found solution for all waste on the planet. Need to recycle it back into raw materials. How. Using plasma, but not regular plasma. Plasma of gas, specific one for each substance. Temperatures between 5,000C up to 15,000C.Who pays the electricity bill?
100% will work.
How to build it, well its not going to be easy. Heat exchange, Radiation, Rays all that can kill any life around while this machine is operational. But, the trials was done in 198x. So, it is very possible to build it again. Many years have passed, technology didnt stand in one place. Why. There only one thing can help gas heat up this much and its a thermal electrical discharge.
That's really the only question.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 23/12/2021 14:03:32
Who pays the electricity bill?
That's really the only question.
Those people who support hadron collider might do.
Or send it toward the sun. ;D
Post by: Bored chemist on 23/12/2021 14:04:32
They don't have enough money.Who pays the electricity bill?
That's really the only question.
Those people who support hadron collider might do.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 23/12/2021 14:06:39
They don't have enough money.
Why. Spend it all.
Post by: Bored chemist on 23/12/2021 15:29:48
They don't have enough money.
Why. Spend it all.
To pay the electricity bill for this
Need to recycle it back into raw materials. How. Using plasma, but not regular plasma. Plasma of gas, specific one for each substance. Temperatures between 5,000C up to 15,000C.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 23/12/2021 16:31:43
To pay the electricity bill for thisNeed to recycle it back into raw materials. How. Using plasma, but not regular plasma. Plasma of gas, specific one for each substance. Temperatures between 5,000C up to 15,000C.
A couple of Nuclear PowerPlants, build huge dynamo mashine or something.
Post by: Bored chemist on 23/12/2021 22:06:45
The UK produces about 30 million tonnes of waste per year. How much power would it take to plasmolysis that?To pay the electricity bill for thisNeed to recycle it back into raw materials. How. Using plasma, but not regular plasma. Plasma of gas, specific one for each substance. Temperatures between 5,000C up to 15,000C.
A couple of Nuclear PowerPlants, build huge dynamo mashine or something.
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 24/12/2021 14:54:08
The UK produces about 30 million tonnes of waste per year. How much power would it take to plasmolysis that?
No idea, i never build this. 200 MAMP per device may be. A lot for sure. Will need one PowerPlant at least.
Post by: Bored chemist on 24/12/2021 15:56:10
So, once again.The UK produces about 30 million tonnes of waste per year. How much power would it take to plasmolysis that?
No idea, i never build this. 200 MAMP per device may be. A lot for sure. Will need one PowerPlant at least.
Who is paying?
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 24/12/2021 17:43:04
So, once again.The UK produces about 30 million tonnes of waste per year. How much power would it take to plasmolysis that?
No idea, i never build this. 200 MAMP per device may be. A lot for sure. Will need one PowerPlant at least.
Who is paying?
Uncle Sam.
Post by: chiralSPO on 26/12/2021 22:05:12
Uncle Sam.
Uncle Sam only has bottomless pockets if it involves killing people in other countries, unfortunately...
Post by: cleanair on 27/12/2021 14:54:58
nuclear-waste-washed-ashore-somalia.jpeg (113.07 kB . 602x452 - viewed 9448 times)In one of the most major articles on the case (+/- #1 in Google among just a few), on 'expertsure.com', it is indicated that the nuclear water dump by Japan in 2023 receives a lot of attention while until now, the nuclear waste dump in Somalia has received almost no attention while the severity of the dumped nuclear waste may be much more significant.
Quote
Yesterday the BBC reported that radiation levels at the crippled Fukushima reactor site are ten million times normal levels. As the oceans near the damaged nuclear plant are becoming contaminated with increasing amounts of nuclear radiation, concerns are growing about how much radioactive poison the planet’s seas can withstand.
However, although it is not receiving anywhere near as much attention as the unfolding disaster in Japan, the massive amounts of illegally dumped radioactive nuclear waste that are still being thrown into Somalia’s oceans potentially could prove to be an even more deadly catastrophe.
https://www.expertsure.com/2011/03/27/more-illegally-dumped-radioactive-waste-found-on-somalias-coast/
In 2008, pirates in Somalia started to hijack ships in the region, hijacking ever more prolific targets, including arms ships, oil tankers and cruise liners, and extracting huge ransoms from their owners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_attacked_by_Somali_pirates_in_2008
In Western media, the pirates were presented as savages without mentioning a motive related to toxic waste dumping in Somalia's oceans.
Example in The Guardian (not a single mention of 'toxic waste dumping'):
(2008) How savage Somali pirates reign on the world's high seas
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/27/somalia1
According to some sources however, the pirates acted with a motive related to toxic waste dumping in Somalia's oceans by 🇪🇺 European companies.
(2009) Somalia used as toxic dumping ground
National governments and NGOs decried their actions as an affront to international maritime law, but few examined the pirates’ claim that a far greater crime continues in Somalia: the illegal dumping of toxic waste.
https://theecologist.org/2009/mar/01/somalia-used-toxic-dumping-ground
'Toxic waste' behind Somali piracy
Somali pirates have accused European firms of dumping toxic waste off the Somali coast and are demanding an $8m ransom for the return of a Ukrainian ship they captured, saying the money will go towards cleaning up the waste...
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/toxic-waste-behind-somali-piracy/
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 27/12/2021 16:31:17
Post by: Bored chemist on 27/12/2021 17:01:06
Toxic waste should be stored on the moon.
So, once again.
Who is paying?
Post by: chiralSPO on 27/12/2021 18:03:12
"better" is not a technical term, but it is interpreted to encompass lower risk to people and planet and more predictable business model (changes in waste regulations and waste markets don't matter as much when you have less waste to deal with). In theory, less waste should also be associated with lower costs, but unfortunately when it is effectively free in practice to dump your $ħ! on your neighbors, it doesn't look good on the books to treat the waste properly ($$$) or to re-engineer your processes to minimize waste...
Post by: evan_au on 27/12/2021 21:07:26
Quote from: vdblnkr34
Toxic waste should be stored on the moon.SpaceX would be happy to launch your payload into Low-Earth Orbit for a mere $2500/kilogram.
- It will cost at least 100 times as much to safely reach the Moon.
- Of course, space launches are a risky business, and no-one wants a canister of nuclear waste dumped onto their country from a failed launch
- So hopefully, no nation would approve toxic waste for launch into space!
For $250,000 per kilogram, it make sense to create less waste, or recycle it more efficiently, or store it more safely on Earth.
- Finland is the first country in the world to complete an underground nuclear waste storage facility
- It is still undergoing commissioning tests
- It is due to start storing real nuclear waste in 2023.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 27/12/2021 21:21:57
Post by: evan_au on 28/12/2021 08:59:40
Quote from:
How much companies pay to store their waste?As little as possible.
- Anything dumped into the air or rivers is essentially "free" to the dumper
- Which is why legislators need to apply pressure to avoid dangerous dumping by setting legal limits, testing for compliance and applying fines for violators.
Unfortunately, the next lowest-cost option is to tender for someone to take it away:
- Frequently, the lowest-cost tenderer will win the contract
- And they achieve their low cost by taking the waste somewhere which has looser rules
- And/or bribing officials to look the other way
- And/or getting President T.Rump to wind back the powers of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) so that it no longer sets or enforces rules about pollution.
Post by: cleanair on 28/12/2021 09:16:37
nuclear-waste-washed-ashore-somalia.jpeg (113.07 kB . 602x452 - viewed 9448 times)In one of the most major articles on the case (+/- #1 in Google among just a few), on 'expertsure.com', it is indicated that the nuclear water dump by Japan in 2023 receives a lot of attention while until now, the nuclear waste dump in Somalia has received almost no attention while the severity of the dumped nuclear waste may be much more significant.
Quote
Yesterday the BBC reported that radiation levels at the crippled Fukushima reactor site are ten million times normal levels. As the oceans near the damaged nuclear plant are becoming contaminated with increasing amounts of nuclear radiation, concerns are growing about how much radioactive poison the planet’s seas can withstand.
However, although it is not receiving anywhere near as much attention as the unfolding disaster in Japan, the massive amounts of illegally dumped radioactive nuclear waste that are still being thrown into Somalia’s oceans potentially could prove to be an even more deadly catastrophe.
https://www.expertsure.com/2011/03/27/more-illegally-dumped-radioactive-waste-found-on-somalias-coast/
In 2008, pirates in Somalia started to hijack ships in the region, hijacking ever more prolific targets, including arms ships, oil tankers and cruise liners, and extracting huge ransoms from their owners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_attacked_by_Somali_pirates_in_2008
In Western media, the pirates were presented as savages without mentioning a motive related to toxic waste dumping in Somalia's oceans.
Example in The Guardian (not a single mention of 'toxic waste dumping'):
(2008) How savage Somali pirates reign on the world's high seas
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/apr/27/somalia1
According to some sources however, the pirates acted with a motive related to toxic waste dumping in Somalia's oceans by 🇪🇺 European companies.
(2009) Somalia used as toxic dumping ground
National governments and NGOs decried their actions as an affront to international maritime law, but few examined the pirates’ claim that a far greater crime continues in Somalia: the illegal dumping of toxic waste.
https://theecologist.org/2009/mar/01/somalia-used-toxic-dumping-ground
'Toxic waste' behind Somali piracy
Somali pirates have accused European firms of dumping toxic waste off the Somali coast and are demanding an $8m ransom for the return of a Ukrainian ship they captured, saying the money will go towards cleaning up the waste...
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/toxic-waste-behind-somali-piracy/
Post by: cleanair on 28/12/2021 09:23:24
Quote from:How much companies pay to store their waste?As little as possible.
- Anything dumped into the air or rivers is essentially "free" to the dumper
- Which is why legislators need to apply pressure to avoid dangerous dumping by setting legal limits, testing for compliance and applying fines for violators.
Unfortunately, the next lowest-cost option is to tender for someone to take it away:
- Frequently, the lowest-cost tenderer will win the contract
- And they achieve their low cost by taking the waste somewhere which has looser rules
- And/or bribing officials to look the other way
- And/or getting President T.Rump to wind back the powers of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) so that it no longer sets or enforces rules about pollution.
Is a solution possible on a global scale? And on what time scale?
Some scientists argue that Nature on Earth could collapse within decades.
(2020) Scientists: Multiple eco-crises could trigger a ‘systemic collapse’
Overlapping environmental crises could tip the planet into “global systemic collapse,” more than 200 top scientists warned.
Sources:
https://phys.org/news/2020-02-multiple-eco-crises-trigger-collapse-scientists.html
https://phys.org/news/2020-02-bumble-bees-extinct-climate-chaos.html
(2021) UN chief calls for bold action to end ‘suicidal war with nature’
“We are losing our suicidal war against nature. An ecosystem collapse is looming. Within decades, millions of animal species can become extinct, resulting in a collapse of Nature on Earth.”
Source: https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/10/1102672
sea-bird.png (24.14 kB . 150x109 - viewed 3659 times)Seabirds Extinct Within Decades
A recent study found a 67 percent decline in seabird populations between 1950 and 2010. “Essentially seabirds are going extinct,” says Wilcox. “Within decades.”
Sources: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0129342
https://www.ecowatch.com/seabirds-plastic-pollution-2609353767.html
In the past decades, 75 percent of all insects have died. Within decades, a tipping point could be reached beyond which a collapse of Nature becomes inevitable.
(2021) The insect apocalypse: ‘Our world will grind to a halt without them’
Insects have declined by 75% in the past 50 years – and the consequences may soon be catastrophic.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/the-insect-apocalypse-our-world-will-grind-to-a-halt-without-them
rainforest-gone-by-2050.png (14.13 kB . 205x160 - viewed 3594 times)(2020) Ecosystems the Size of the Amazon Rainforest Could Collapse Within Decades
One-fifth of the jungle is to be burned in the coming years. “I’m not getting into this nonsense of defending land for the Indians,” the president said. A Brazilian general who last year served on the board of Canadian mining giant Belo Sun heads Brazil’s federal agency for indigenous peoples.
Sources:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00508-4
https://gizmodo.com/ecosystems-the-size-of-the-amazon-rainforest-could-coll-1842241699
https://news.mongabay.com/2020/01/impending-amazon-tipping-point-puts-biome-and-world-at-risk-scientists-warn/
https://www.ecowatch.com/indigenous-people-amazon-2645327056.html
Post by: evan_au on 28/12/2021 21:08:00
Quote from: cleanair
radiation levels at the crippled Fukushima reactor site are ten million times normal levelsI assume that this is measured inside the destroyed reactor building, rather than outside it?
Without wanting to minimize the mess that is Fukishima (2011), Chernobyl (1986) was worse in terms of the amount of radiation released into the atmosphere.
- A graphite moderator which catches fire is very hard to contain
- But so is a water moderator that breaks down, releasing Hydrogen, which then explodes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_accidents
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 29/12/2021 13:16:17
Post by: chiralSPO on 29/12/2021 14:22:21
About Chernobyl (1986) actually was nothing at all. It was a mistake made during fire extinguishing. They pour lot of water into hot burning reactor that evaporate it all with the rest of the materials in it and than winds did the rest. If no one would put water into reactor, nothing would happen. But, back in the 1986 they didn't know that and decided to cool it down with a water. Real explosion made minor damages, mostly destroyed walls and insulations..
The accident at Chernobyl was not "nothing at all". True, a melt-down at a nuclear plant is NOT the same as a nuclear bomb exploding, but the explosion at Chernobyl was due to a rapid release of nuclear energy. The fire was caused by the explosion, not the other way around. And the fact that there is still a sizable region around the plant that is closed off due to lingering contamination speaks to the magnitude of the problem.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/chernobyl-accident.aspx
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/chernobyl-bg.html
Post by: Colin2B on 29/12/2021 15:08:50
The accident at Chernobyl was not "nothing at all". ........... there is still a sizable region around the plant that is closed off due to lingering contamination speaks to the magnitude of the problem.
Six days after the explosion the radioactive plume drifted over UK uplands and the fallout resulted in regular testing and restrictions on the sale of livestock which lasted until 2012.
Post by: gerardseal on 30/12/2021 10:50:56
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 31/12/2021 03:25:46
Quote from: vdblnkr34Toxic waste should be stored on the moon.SpaceX would be happy to launch your payload into Low-Earth Orbit for a mere $2500/kilogram.
- It will cost at least 100 times as much to safely reach the Moon.
- Of course, space launches are a risky business, and no-one wants a canister of nuclear waste dumped onto their country from a failed launch
- So hopefully, no nation would approve toxic waste for launch into space!
For $250,000 per kilogram, it make sense to create less waste, or recycle it more efficiently, or store it more safely on Earth.
- Finland is the first country in the world to complete an underground nuclear waste storage facility
- It is still undergoing commissioning tests
- It is due to start storing real nuclear waste in 2023.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onkalo_spent_nuclear_fuel_repository
If to equip helium balloon with a heater it should reach the moon. Right?
Post by: Colin2B on 31/12/2021 08:28:26
If to equip helium balloon with a heater it should reach the moon. Right?Ha ha, very funny ;D
Post by: evan_au on 31/12/2021 10:59:17
Quote from: vdblnkr34
If to equip helium balloon with a heater it should reach the moon. Right?That makes about as much sense as the 17th century scientist Charles Morton who thought birds migrated to the Moon for the winter.
Both hypotheses fail because our atmosphere extends less than 1% of the way to the Moon.
https://www.wired.com/2014/10/fantastically-wrong-scientist-thought-birds-migrate-moon/
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 31/12/2021 23:15:44
Post by: Bored chemist on 01/01/2022 00:38:13
Helium balloon with heater can go up to 25km above the ground. Did anyone try to do more? I dont think so.You really are serious, aren't you?
What holds a balloon up?
Post by: vdblnkr34 on 01/01/2022 20:03:12
Post by: Bored chemist on 01/01/2022 20:24:32
No idea.Maybe you should check.
Post by: Colin2B on 01/01/2022 23:39:07
Hot balloon going up. So I assume that hot balloon filled with helium gas might reach the moon.Not so. Might be worth learning some basic physics