SoylentNews

Washington State Panel Outlines Risk of Oil-by-rail Terminal

posted by mrpg on Saturday November 25 2017, @12:23PM   
from the what-could-go-wrong? dept.

realDonaldTrump writes:

A major oil-by-rail terminal proposed on the Columbia River in Washington state poses a potential risk of oil spills, train accidents and longer emergency response times due to road traffic, an environmental study has found.

Many of the risks could be decreased with certain mitigation measures, but the study released Tuesday outlined four areas where it said the impacts are significant and cannot be avoided.

The study said that while "the likelihood of occurrence of the potential for oil spills may be low, the consequences of the events could be severe."

[...] The study identified the four risks that could not be avoided as train accidents, the emergency response delays, negative impacts of the project on low-income communities and the possibility that an earthquake would damage the facility's dock and cause an oil spill.

Washington state panel outlines risk of oil-by-rail terminal

---

Original Submission

• Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @07:06PM (4 children)

  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @07:06PM (#601458)

  > Even the hugest oil spills, the ones with loud predictions of "planet-ending impact any minute now",
  Who predicted that? I'm thinking nobody did, at least not seriously.

  http://thechoiceperspective.com/2014/09/21/loss-of-atlantic-current-dooms-mankind/ [thechoiceperspective.com]
  https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_industryoil15.htm [bibliotecapleyades.net]
  Here are a couple examples, from among too many for a bad joke.

  The Ixtoc I spill was in 1979:
  Some larger species with longer life spans took years to recover from the Ixtoc spill. It wasn't until the late-1980s that the population of Kemp's Ridley turtles, which lay a couple of hundred eggs a year, as opposed to the millions produced by shrimp, started recovering.

  Ten years. If this is your definition of "lasting damage", it is plain laughable.

  The researchers found that at only a few parts per billion, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons caused a long-term increase in mortality rates.

  Did those researchers care to reconcile their findings with the facts such as these? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_seep [wikipedia.org]
  While PAH are definitely unhealthy for higher animals, a number of common bacteria do eat them. Precisely because natural sources emit these since forever.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycyclic_aromatic_hydrocarbon#Environmental_distribution_and_degradation [wikipedia.org]

  Parent

  Starting Score:	0		points
  Moderation		+1
  Insightful=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Insightful' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		1

• Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @07:59PM (2 children)

  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @07:59PM (#601478)

  > Ten years. If this is your definition of "lasting damage", it is plain laughable.

  Hooray, it's semantics time! What's your definition? How about 30 years? I mentioned a 30-year period in the next paragraph, which you ignored. fritsd linked to an infographic showing effects ~34 years later.

  > Did those researchers care to reconcile their findings with the facts such as these? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_seep [wikipedia.org]

  I don't know. Your Wikipedia article says:

  Cold seeps constitute a biome supporting several endemic species.

  Cold seeps develop unique topography over time [...]

  In places where oil naturally seeps into the ocean, species that are adapted to the oil form an ecosystem. If humans add more oil into that ecosystem, those organisms will probably cope well with the (minor) change. However, if we suddenly introduce oil into a place where it wasn't prevalent, the ecosystem is unlikely to cope well with it.

  >While PAH are definitely unhealthy for higher animals, a number of common bacteria do eat them. Precisely because natural sources emit these since forever.

  Bacteria proliferate at different rates depending on environmental conditions such as temperature; this is why we use refrigerators. There are stories [hanskrause.de] of mammoths (which went extinct thousands of years ago) being found in the Arctic with their flesh in "still-edible" condition. The U.S. Congress is now considering a plan to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

  Parent

  • Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @08:26PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @08:26PM (#601489)

    How about 30 years? I mentioned a 30-year period in the next paragraph, which you ignored.

    As anyone should ignore rhetorical "estimates" without a shred of evidence.
    BTW, I mentioned millions of years, which you ignored too. ;)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fossil_species_in_the_La_Brea_Tar_Pits [wikipedia.org]
    Note the biodiversity.

    However, if we suddenly introduce oil into a place where it wasn't prevalent, the ecosystem is unlikely to cope well with it.

    Agreed. Most ecosystems are not prepared to cope well with any sudden change, of whatever nature. However, virtually any is prepared to recover after one. Because shit happens, with mankind or without.

    Bacteria proliferate at different rates depending on environmental conditions such as temperature

    Yeah, but in this case the cop-out ain't working. ;) The everyone's favorite superbug, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, can and does grow literally anywhere and on anything.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16478452 [nih.gov]
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28314727 [nih.gov]

    Parent

    • Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @12:48PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @12:48PM (#602041)

      > As anyone should ignore rhetorical "estimates" without a shred of evidence.

      The estimate was about mussel beds and intertidal zones. NOAA has been monitoring [noaa.gov] mussel populations, and found that they oscillate. However, they also say [noaa.gov],

      Deeply penetrated oil continues to visibly leach from a few beaches, as on Smith Island.

      In some areas, intertidal animals, such as mussels, are still contaminated by oil, affecting not only the mussels but any animals (including people) that eat them.

      Some rocky sites that were stripped of heavy plant cover by high-pressure, hot-water cleaning remain mostly bare rock.

      Rich clam beds that suffered high mortalities from oil and extensive beach cleaning have not recolonized to their previous levels.

      That's lasting damage.

      I wrote "fritsd linked to an infographic showing effects ~34 years later" and you ignored that too.

      > BTW, I mentioned millions of years, which you ignored too. ;)

      You wrote:

      A newly man-made asphalt lake is generally not useful (except for palaeontologists a million years hence)

      How is that pertinent to the question of whether an oil spill can cause lasting damage?

      > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fossil_species_in_the_La_Brea_Tar_Pits [wikipedia.org]
      > Note the biodiversity.

      I note that many of those species are now extinct. The "La Brea Tar Pits" article says

      Animals would wander in, become trapped, and eventually die. Predators would enter to eat the trapped animals and also become stuck.

      Creatures of various species were trapped and killed; some of those species went extinct. To say the least, it doesn't support the claim of no lasting damage.

      >Yeah, but in this case the cop-out ain't working. ;) The everyone's favorite superbug, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, can and does grow literally anywhere and on anything.

      I didn't deny that bacteria are able to consume hydrocarbons. I acknowledge that. I'm saying that bacteria grow slowly under some conditions, such as cold. I didn't say that cold is lethal to them. I'm saying that in the instance of Prince William Sound, their activity is meagre enough that oil spilled in 1989 is still present.

      Conversely, if an oil spill supported a sudden flourishing of bacteria, the bacteria themselves might be harmful. You gave an example of a pathogenic strain. Also, think of "blooms" of algae or dinoflagellates.

      Parent

• Re:... significant impacts that cannot be avoided? (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @09:13PM

  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 25 2017, @09:13PM (#601499)

  > http://thechoiceperspective.com/2014/09/21/loss-of-atlantic-current-dooms-mankind/ [thechoiceperspective.com]
  > https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_industryoil15.htm [bibliotecapleyades.net]
  > Here are a couple examples, from among too many for a bad joke.

  They're not independent: the first page cites the second. It also cites a Russian propaganda outlet, english.ruvr.ru, also known as sputniknews.com. It also says:

  After receiving a contact from a naval scientist via a regular guest on a national radio show on Genesis Network, John Moore sent Dr. Deagle the info on Dr Zangari’s work.

  I think "Genesis Network" refers to the Genesis Communications Network.

  The network is known for conspiracy-theory programming; Alex Jones is its most prominent syndicated personality.

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genesis_Communications_Network

  The first page looks like a bad joke to me.

  As for "Gianluigi Zangari," I am doubtful that's a real person. I searched for his name on the Web, and found the non-peer-reviewed essay cited by your two pages, and little else. A search engine snippet from LinkedIn says:

  Gianluigi Zangari. fisico teorico. Location Rome Area, Italy Industry Research. Current: Project Head at NOUS Neuroscience: Past: Associate Researcher at LNF-INFN, Principal Researcher at Helmholtz-Zentrum Berlin, External Lecturer at ENEA, External Lecturer at...

  https://www.linkedin.com/pub/dir/gianluigi/+/cern-company

  I didn't see any mention of him on the INFN, ENEA or CERN sites and didn't see any Web presence of NOUS Neuroscience.

  A commenter [wordpress.com] on a Web forum wrote

  The coldest winter in a 1000 years is a great example of chinese whispers in the modern media.
  A crackpot called Dr. Gianluigi Zangari claimed that the Gulf Stream had slowed because of the BP oil spill. Some Polish blogs reported it, then a radio show interviewed a meteorologist and asked him what would happen if the Gulf Stream did indeed slow down or stop. The meteorologist said it would become colder in Europe. This was picked up as forecast by Polish newspapers, which then became a story in Russia, which then became ‘Forecasters predict the coldest winter in a 1000 years’.

  That agrees with what I saw elsewhere. It looks like someone created a false identity to spread one piece of disinformation.

  Parent