L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
1–10 of 229 posts
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#2It's amazing how little some people have cared, this was not that they didn't know, they certainly knew, otherwise, it'd not have resorted to hiding the stuff by dumping it into the sea..
It'd not be unreasonable to hunt down those responsible, and make them pay for cleaning it up. Sure, they're probably dead by now, but they probably left a lot of money.
I don't think it's even relevant that "it was not illegal at the time", they knew the stuff was toxic, and they chose to release it into the oceans, just because no one had explicitly made a law banning them from doing so.. Common sense should be the first law.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#3I’d probably be more worried about the nerve gas and mustard gas munitions dumped into the ocean after WW2. Far more toxic.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#4Well that was a sad article to read on a Monday morning. If this is what we've just scratched the surface on - I'm nervous to what we don't know in terms of ocean dumping.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#5I’d probably be more worried about the nerve gas and mustard gas munitions dumped into the ocean after WW2. Far more toxic.
My go to article for that, I have posted this link[0] many times. Scary as it is what is worse this is only that which we know of and not was dumped by governments or agencies that did not want it known.
Just look back at WW2 and the number of merchant ships[1] that were sunk! Then throw in all the warships that went down during both world wars.
Of course we have quite a bit of radioactive material in the oceans as well[2][3]
[0]https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/decaying-weapo...
[1] http://www.usmm.org/shipsunkdamaged.html
[2] http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2017/ph241/stevens2/
[3] https://e360.yale.edu/features/radioactivity_in_the_ocean_di...
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#6great article, but whats up with putting things on top of each other?
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#7I’d probably be more worried about the nerve gas and mustard gas munitions dumped into the ocean after WW2. Far more toxic.
I wouldn't. Neither mustard nor sarin gas is nearly as resilient to breakdown as DDT. They break down at a much faster rate and ought not to undergo such extreme bioaccumulation.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#8I’d probably be more worried about the nerve gas and mustard gas munitions dumped into the ocean after WW2. Far more toxic.
This is a real problem in the Baltic Sea; there are still huge amounts of chemical weapons and sea mines remaining from both world wars. The triggers are usually broken or corroded, but the explosive are occasionally unstable due to salt water, and rusty barrels with Mustard Gas are obviously quite unhealthy.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#9> “We found actual photos of the workers at 2 in the morning dumping — not only dumping barrels off of the barges in the middle of the Santa Monica Basin,” he said, “but before they would dump the barrels, they would take a big ax or hatchet to them, and cut them open on purpose so they would sink.”
Incredible.
Re: L.A.'s coast was once a DDT dumping ground, but no one could see it until now
#10It's amazing how little some people have cared, this was not that they didn't know, they certainly knew, otherwise, it'd not have resorted to hiding the stuff by dumping it into the sea.. It'd not be unreasonable to hunt down those responsible, and make them pay for cleaning it up. Sure, they're probably dead by now, but they probably left a lot of money. I don't think it's even relevant that "it was not illegal at t…
One of the first paragraphs of the article: at the time it was considered dumping the barrels in the deep ocean was sufficient because the vast amount of water would dilute the chemical. The shortcut they took was that they did not go that far into the ocean but instead kept much closer to shore and dumped the barrels there, as well as punctured them when they floated. The discovery that's lamented is the "shortcut dumping ground". This does not fit with your jumped-to conclusions.