"The Solution to Pollution is Dilution"
January 21, 2015 12:33 PM Subscribe
That is one scary map. Especially when you consider how much stuff was dumped without records being kept.
Does anyone have a good source on what the current situation is with most the WWII munitions that got dumped? I mean, at what point is it safe to assume that pretty much all the containers have rusted through? Or is that never a safe assumption (some get buried in mud and can remain sealed indefinitely)? Is there any kind of "half-life" assessment for the total "payload" (as it were)? I mean, is peak "nasty-stuff-gets-released-into-the-ocean" from that dumping behind us or ahead of us, and amongst the various things that got dumped, which should concern us most?
posted by yoink at 12:53 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Does anyone have a good source on what the current situation is with most the WWII munitions that got dumped? I mean, at what point is it safe to assume that pretty much all the containers have rusted through? Or is that never a safe assumption (some get buried in mud and can remain sealed indefinitely)? Is there any kind of "half-life" assessment for the total "payload" (as it were)? I mean, is peak "nasty-stuff-gets-released-into-the-ocean" from that dumping behind us or ahead of us, and amongst the various things that got dumped, which should concern us most?
posted by yoink at 12:53 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I'm surprised how almost all of the identified sites are so close to shore. I would have thought they would head further out to sea. The European ones looked like they just about dumped it on the beach.
posted by Dip Flash at 12:54 PM on January 21, 2015
posted by Dip Flash at 12:54 PM on January 21, 2015
Dip Flash: I think some of that may be due to how uncertain values are represented. When you click on some of the near-shore sites, sometimes the location isn't known beyond "off [X]" which basically amounts to, "dumping vessel left from [X] port".
posted by indubitable at 12:59 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by indubitable at 12:59 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
DON'T DRINK CHEMICAL WEAPONS! KEEP OUT OF EYE! DILUTE! DILUTE! OK!
posted by malocchio at 1:03 PM on January 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
posted by malocchio at 1:03 PM on January 21, 2015 [4 favorites]
It's interesting to see SS John Harvey there, because that one wasn't quite "deliberate".
Its position is also accurately known, right next to Bari in Italy. It'll be leaking sulfur mustard for the next thousand years. The Italian government has looked at the problem and decided there isn't any solution.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:07 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Its position is also accurately known, right next to Bari in Italy. It'll be leaking sulfur mustard for the next thousand years. The Italian government has looked at the problem and decided there isn't any solution.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:07 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I don't know, I find this map weirdly encouraging. Look at all those weapons that will never be purposely directed at people again. Look at all those chemicals that we tried to make sure never hurt anyone.
It's a weird place for optimism, I admit.
posted by maryr at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
It's a weird place for optimism, I admit.
posted by maryr at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
I think some of that may be due to how uncertain values are represented
Some, yeah, but when you're dumping things in the frickin' Skagerrak or the Channel there's really nowhere to go that's actually all that far "offshore." They really did do a lot of this in an unbelievably cavalier way.
But that is also, indubitably, easy to say with hindsight. At the end of WWII they had vast stockpiles which were dangerous to keep around on land, all kinds of pressing problems to deal with from every quarter, they'd flung a shitload of this stuff around in battles for the past 6 years. No doubt it would have been difficult to muster the political will to say "you know, we really need to devote a huge amount of resources to dealing with this problem."
posted by yoink at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015
Some, yeah, but when you're dumping things in the frickin' Skagerrak or the Channel there's really nowhere to go that's actually all that far "offshore." They really did do a lot of this in an unbelievably cavalier way.
But that is also, indubitably, easy to say with hindsight. At the end of WWII they had vast stockpiles which were dangerous to keep around on land, all kinds of pressing problems to deal with from every quarter, they'd flung a shitload of this stuff around in battles for the past 6 years. No doubt it would have been difficult to muster the political will to say "you know, we really need to devote a huge amount of resources to dealing with this problem."
posted by yoink at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015
At first I was all "what in the fuck was Canada doing with mustard gas in 1947?", and then googled. Looks like we were experimenting on human subjects, our own soldiers. There's a bit of Canadian history you don't hear about often. I await Harper's announcement of a commemorative coin.
posted by Hoopo at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
posted by Hoopo at 1:10 PM on January 21, 2015 [5 favorites]
It'll be leaking sulfur mustard for the next thousand years.
Do you have a good source on the continuing presence of sulfur mustard at the Bari site? I went on a little Google hunt which turned up all kinds of interesting things (including the fact that it was in treating the victims of the Bari attack that a doctor noticed the way mustard gas inhibited cell division in white blood cells, which lead, in turn, to the development of one of the first--and still a major class--of effective anti-cancer drugs.) But I couldn't find anything about any ongoing threat posed by the wreck.
posted by yoink at 1:18 PM on January 21, 2015
Do you have a good source on the continuing presence of sulfur mustard at the Bari site? I went on a little Google hunt which turned up all kinds of interesting things (including the fact that it was in treating the victims of the Bari attack that a doctor noticed the way mustard gas inhibited cell division in white blood cells, which lead, in turn, to the development of one of the first--and still a major class--of effective anti-cancer drugs.) But I couldn't find anything about any ongoing threat posed by the wreck.
posted by yoink at 1:18 PM on January 21, 2015
Operation Cut Holes and Sink 'Em.
There's surprising amounts of this stuff around: in trying to find a dump I'd read about that was just off the beach close enough to be "don't go to that end of the beach" there were an unsettling number of similar hits.
posted by Ogre Lawless at 1:19 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
There's surprising amounts of this stuff around: in trying to find a dump I'd read about that was just off the beach close enough to be "don't go to that end of the beach" there were an unsettling number of similar hits.
posted by Ogre Lawless at 1:19 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
The Canadian dump sites (or most of them) aren't on that map, as far as I can tell. There were several off the coast of Atlantic Canada that are not on that map. It's not clear that they have all yet been mapped either.
posted by bonehead at 1:24 PM on January 21, 2015
posted by bonehead at 1:24 PM on January 21, 2015
Yeah there were only 2 shown on the map, and one was done by the Americans off Nova Scotia
posted by Hoopo at 1:26 PM on January 21, 2015
posted by Hoopo at 1:26 PM on January 21, 2015
It'll be leaking sulfur mustard for the next thousand years.
That would be surprising, but perhaps possible if the majority was tightly contained I suppose. Never say never.
I'm somewhat skeptical, however as mustard hydrolyses pretty quickly in water. Recent work in the Baltic has shown that there are ready populations of degraders to mineralize the hydrolytic products. In other words, if it's leaking, it can break down even at sea floor conditions in the Baltic (just how quickly isn't well established in the reports I've seen).
posted by bonehead at 1:32 PM on January 21, 2015
That would be surprising, but perhaps possible if the majority was tightly contained I suppose. Never say never.
I'm somewhat skeptical, however as mustard hydrolyses pretty quickly in water. Recent work in the Baltic has shown that there are ready populations of degraders to mineralize the hydrolytic products. In other words, if it's leaking, it can break down even at sea floor conditions in the Baltic (just how quickly isn't well established in the reports I've seen).
posted by bonehead at 1:32 PM on January 21, 2015
I would assume this is a partial list. It has nothing around Somalia, which if memory serves me well, was a long time dumping ground for many different countries.
posted by destro at 1:33 PM on January 21, 2015
posted by destro at 1:33 PM on January 21, 2015
SS John Harvey: my info came from a TV show I watched once. But if you think about it, it makes sense. As bad as the bombing was, there's no way it ruptured every single shell which was on that ship. The rest are down there, rusting away, and leaking.
At the end of WWII they had vast stockpiles which were dangerous to keep around on land, all kinds of pressing problems to deal with from every quarter, they'd flung a shitload of this stuff around in battles for the past 6 years.
Uh, no. By WWII there were international treaties banning use of chemical weapons. The Allies stockpiled chemical weapons in the European theater as a deterrent but never used them.
That's why the V1 and V2 attacks on London never carried nerve gas. Hitler knew that if he ever used nerve gas on the Allies, they'd start dropping mustard gas on German cities, and that would have been too much even for him. Mustard gas wasn't as high-tech as nerve gas, but it's nasty, nasty stuff. The treaties didn't bind Hitler, but deterrence did.
So yeah, they had sufficient stockpiles, but they hadn't "flung a shitload" around. Not a drop, actually.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:33 PM on January 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
At the end of WWII they had vast stockpiles which were dangerous to keep around on land, all kinds of pressing problems to deal with from every quarter, they'd flung a shitload of this stuff around in battles for the past 6 years.
Uh, no. By WWII there were international treaties banning use of chemical weapons. The Allies stockpiled chemical weapons in the European theater as a deterrent but never used them.
That's why the V1 and V2 attacks on London never carried nerve gas. Hitler knew that if he ever used nerve gas on the Allies, they'd start dropping mustard gas on German cities, and that would have been too much even for him. Mustard gas wasn't as high-tech as nerve gas, but it's nasty, nasty stuff. The treaties didn't bind Hitler, but deterrence did.
So yeah, they had sufficient stockpiles, but they hadn't "flung a shitload" around. Not a drop, actually.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:33 PM on January 21, 2015 [2 favorites]
I would assume this is a partial list.
Reviewing it further, I agree. It's a bit tricky to get just chemical weapon dump sites, as they were/are often mixed with munitions disposal, which causes its own set of problems.
Credible figures I've seen put the number of ocean sites for munitions (including chemical agents) off of the Canadian Atlantic coast in the thousands. Most are not well documented (i.e. who, what when), but many have been reported by commercial fishers.
posted by bonehead at 1:38 PM on January 21, 2015
Reviewing it further, I agree. It's a bit tricky to get just chemical weapon dump sites, as they were/are often mixed with munitions disposal, which causes its own set of problems.
Credible figures I've seen put the number of ocean sites for munitions (including chemical agents) off of the Canadian Atlantic coast in the thousands. Most are not well documented (i.e. who, what when), but many have been reported by commercial fishers.
posted by bonehead at 1:38 PM on January 21, 2015
So yeah, they had sufficient stockpiles, but they hadn't "flung a shitload" around. Not a drop, actually.
Oh, d'oh! Somehow I missed that this map was purely chemical weapons dumps. Because I was thinking of the many, many conventional weapons also dumped at the time. But you're right, the dumping of the chemical weapons in particular was wildly irresponsible. Still, I think it's still more understandable (not more "right"--I'm just trying to understand the mindset) in the wake of the massive worldwide destruction of the past six years. There's a way in which protests on the level of "but think how dangerous this will be in some uncertain time frame in the future" would have been a lot harder to heed standing amid the general wreckage of WWII.
posted by yoink at 1:40 PM on January 21, 2015
Oh, d'oh! Somehow I missed that this map was purely chemical weapons dumps. Because I was thinking of the many, many conventional weapons also dumped at the time. But you're right, the dumping of the chemical weapons in particular was wildly irresponsible. Still, I think it's still more understandable (not more "right"--I'm just trying to understand the mindset) in the wake of the massive worldwide destruction of the past six years. There's a way in which protests on the level of "but think how dangerous this will be in some uncertain time frame in the future" would have been a lot harder to heed standing amid the general wreckage of WWII.
posted by yoink at 1:40 PM on January 21, 2015
> No doubt it would have been difficult to muster the political will to say...
In a few million years, when super-intelligent insects (or whatever) have replaced us at the top of Earth's food chain, that phrase will pop up in a lot of their archeology textbooks.
posted by The Card Cheat at 1:45 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
In a few million years, when super-intelligent insects (or whatever) have replaced us at the top of Earth's food chain, that phrase will pop up in a lot of their archeology textbooks.
posted by The Card Cheat at 1:45 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Looking at this map, all I could think was, "Man, if the homeopaths were right then we'd all be dead by now."
posted by Johnny Assay at 1:59 PM on January 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
posted by Johnny Assay at 1:59 PM on January 21, 2015 [12 favorites]
If the homeopaths were right wouldn't we all be invulnerable to chemical warfare?
posted by yoink at 2:01 PM on January 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
posted by yoink at 2:01 PM on January 21, 2015 [6 favorites]
If you're fascinated by this kind of stuff, I heartily recommend Aftermath: The Remnants of War. It goes into terrifying detail on how much unexploded ordnance is still just sitting around from World War I, let alone more recent conflicts. And how unbelievably casual the US Government was about disposing of chemical weapons.
posted by scrump at 2:11 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by scrump at 2:11 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
And I was worried about that cargo of Lindane in the bottom of the channel, that they said is safer there, than a salvage operation. What a joke, and you see news stories, WHERE HAVE ALL THE COD GONE? Ha ha ha ha.
First they came for the cod,
Because I am not cod,
I didn't speak up,
Then they came for the Whales,
Though large, I did not speak up,
Then they came for the oceans,
I could not speak up,
Because I was dead,
The Walrus and the Carpenter,
Had eaten every one.
posted by Oyéah at 2:16 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
First they came for the cod,
Because I am not cod,
I didn't speak up,
Then they came for the Whales,
Though large, I did not speak up,
Then they came for the oceans,
I could not speak up,
Because I was dead,
The Walrus and the Carpenter,
Had eaten every one.
posted by Oyéah at 2:16 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Russia ends US nuclear security alliance
Since the cooperative agreement began, US experts have helped destroy hundreds of weapons and nuclear-powered submarines, pay workers’ salaries, install security measures at myriad facilities containing weapons material across Russia and the former Soviet Union, and conduct training programs for their personnel.posted by Golden Eternity at 2:20 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
Officials said estimates of how much bomb-grade material has either been destroyed or secured inside the former Soviet Union is classified but insist the stockpiles are enough to make many hundreds of atomic bombs.
The work has been driven by deep concern that large supplies of nuclear material could be stolen by terrorists seeking weapons of mass destruction or diverted by underpaid workers susceptible to bribes.
... former Republican senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, who last visited some of the facilities in 2012, said he wonders if the Russians have the expertise needed to keep track of the vast amount of nuclear bomb material.
“The housekeeping by the Russians has not been comprehensive,” Lugar said in an interview. “There had been work done [with the United States] hunting down nuclear materials. This is now terminated.”
Some warn that the distrust on both sides could bleed into other areas, including arms control treaties.
It's good to know the Chemical Weapons People have built their safety models on sound homeopathic principles.
posted by davemee at 3:21 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by davemee at 3:21 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
A little dab'll do ya! No wonder tbose creatures beach themselves randomly.
posted by Oyéah at 4:17 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Oyéah at 4:17 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]
« Older You're Not Just Imagining Things | Making himself a moot point Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by RavenHouse at 12:47 PM on January 21, 2015 [1 favorite]