Althouse: "EPA Says It Released 3 Million Gallons Of Contaminated Water Into River."

August 10, 2015

"EPA Says It Released 3 Million Gallons Of Contaminated Water Into River."

"Scientists say it's the largest untreated mine drainage in the state, and problematic concentrations of zinc, copper, cadmium, iron, lead, manganese and aluminum are choking off the Upper Animas River's ecosystem."

70 comments:

B said...: I found a video of the EPA causing the leak.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Uy9wsfkok; 8/10/15, 12:13 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Top Men.; 8/10/15, 12:13 PM
Etienne said...: Noise compared to the shit we put into the atmosphere. Forest for the trees shit...; 8/10/15, 12:14 PM
Original Mike said...: Matt, you have to get the punctuation right:

Top. Men.; 8/10/15, 12:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Yay for more government! I bet they raise rates now too.; 8/10/15, 12:15 PM
khesanh0802 said...: OPM. IRS. FBI. Secret Service. Now EPA screws the pooch. Who's next? What a wonderfully well run administration. I want MORE government,please.; 8/10/15, 12:19 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "The EPA initially said 1 million gallons of wastewater had been released, but that figure has risen sharply."

-- Sadly, I'm used to that from this administration by now.; 8/10/15, 12:21 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "After waiting a day to reveal the incident, the EPA has been criticized by those who say it didn't announce the accident soon enough. EPA officials say it took time to realize the magnitude of the spill."

-- #IfExxonDidIt; 8/10/15, 12:21 PM
damikesc said...: Did it rise...unexpectedly?

But they want us to pay thru the nose for energy to "protect" the environment while they seem anxious to kill aquatic life.; 8/10/15, 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Imagine if this were a firm, like say BP who had this spill. What would the reaction be from the EPA, WH, and MSM?

exactly. Tar, Feathers and a Billion dollar fine.

Damages paid to all the impacted parties and punitive damages as well...

from the EPA, I suspect it will be a whine that they need more money.; 8/10/15, 12:22 PM
Original Mike said...: If a private company had made this mistake the EPA would have come down on them like a ton of bricks. You can argue whether or not that's appropriate, but since it's the government there will be no repercussions.; 8/10/15, 12:23 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Heads at EPA should roll for this.

Not the people who made the mistake if they were acting in accordance with due diligence/safety, etc.

The people who hid it, then tried to lie about the scope of the mistake? There're plenty of poli-sci majors and environmental activists who'd LOVE a job in the EPA who, by the way, HAVEN'T lied to Americans about extensive damage to our country's natural wonderlands. I say give them a shot.; 8/10/15, 12:24 PM
Original Mike said...: "from the EPA, I suspect it will be a whine that they need more money."

Wow, you're even more cynical than I. Kudos.; 8/10/15, 12:26 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Also: I am officially dumber for even wading into the comments over at NPR.; 8/10/15, 12:26 PM
Hagar said...: Thanks, Professor.

There is nothing "accidental" about this.

First off, do not go to digging on the downstream foot of a dam full of water.
If you have to, then build another dam downstream first, or otherwise make sure you can contain any potential blow-out.

This mine was abandoned in 1923, so the dam would just have been built with random fill materials and no engineering design whatever for either stability or permeability. A blow-out was a real live possibility even without the digging.

The dam was leaking, so something needed to be done to stop that.
That should have required some investigation by the state authorities, and an engineering design for constructing any proposed improvements with suitable precautions to prevent any such "accidents" as the one that occurred.

You don't just send a crew with a backhoe out to "see if they can find anything."; 8/10/15, 12:31 PM
Original Mike said...: Why do the Democrats want dirtier water?; 8/10/15, 12:31 PM
Levi Starks said...: At a current discharge rate of about 600 cubic ft per second or 250,000 gallons per minute, that 3 million gallons represents about 12 minutes of river flow. Less than 1% of the rivers daily flow. I think it will be diluted pretty fast. At least that's what I'd be unsuccessfully arguing if I were a private business owner.; 8/10/15, 12:33 PM
jacksonjay said...: khesanh,
You failed to mention the wonderful VA allowing vets to die and punking the waiting lists.

I watched that CBS Sunday Morning yesterday and Charles Osgood failed to mention who caused the spill. Bow-tie was probably too tight. An oversight. No biggy! Let the audience think what they will! Journalism!; 8/10/15, 12:35 PM
Scott M said...: Wait, wait, wait. I thought government was just another name for things we do together.; 8/10/15, 12:40 PM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: Just imagine the superpowers you'd get after being bitten by a radioactive Northern Snakehead.; 8/10/15, 12:41 PM
Drago said...: I guarantee that Matt Damon or some other designated moron on the left will in short order produce a movie that blames this on private industry via a double-secret-decoder-ring ploy to discredit our benevolent government overseers.; 8/10/15, 12:41 PM
Drago said...: Eric the Fruit Bat: "Just imagine the superpowers you'd get after being bitten by a radioactive Northern Snakehead"

SYFY is already on it.; 8/10/15, 12:42 PM
exhelodrvr1 said...: They're running our health care. But at least President Obama will make sure that they are taking responsibility for this!!; 8/10/15, 12:42 PM
Nichevo said...: Plug the hole daddee!; 8/10/15, 12:48 PM
chickelit said...: The Animas river feeds the Colorado river and so those chemical elements will wind up everywhere in the southwest.; 8/10/15, 12:51 PM
Hagar said...: Speaking of the VA, I hope you all noted that the upshot after all that brouhaha was that no one got fired, and the VA got 17 billion dollars added to their budget.

Some bad publicity, but hey, "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me!" It was worth it for that kind of jack, and there is always a possibility they can find a way later to get back at those @#$%^!!! politicians who called them those nasty names.; 8/10/15, 12:53 PM
Hagar said...: and southern California.; 8/10/15, 12:54 PM
chickelit said...: Here's the thing: when a big evil chemical company makes such a mistake, they can always be sued out of their profits. Not so with the EPA. We will sue ourselves. Only attorneys will get wealthy.; 8/10/15, 12:56 PM
averagejoe said...: "We're from the government and we're here to help!"; 8/10/15, 1:00 PM
SteveR said...: A contractor was doing the actual work probably. No EPA person would be operating any "heavy equipment". So they will ultimately be blamed for not following the well planned out instructions drawn up by another contractor and approved by EPA. Something like that.; 8/10/15, 1:03 PM
averagejoe said...: Nichevo said...
Plug the hole daddee!

8/10/15, 12:48 PM

LOL! LMAO! Nobody's madder than Obama about this... He's now trying to determine who's responsible so he knows whose ass he's going to kick... Most Transparent Administration Ever!; 8/10/15, 1:07 PM
furious_a said...: They have to poison the River in order to save it.; 8/10/15, 1:07 PM
Sigivald said...: I've seen pictures of the spill on Facebook for a while, with breathless headlines from environmental groups.

None of which, of course, mentioned that the EPA had done it, or that it was from a historical mine that had been abandoned for almost a century.

Because that's not useful to the "industry is wicked" narrative.

(And Mr. Starks is correct - in the big picture this is not significant downstream; at worst they'll stop irrigation feed or city water intake for a day while it passes.); 8/10/15, 1:13 PM
Birches said...: Wow. Read the NPR comments for a full helping of cognitive dissonance.; 8/10/15, 1:13 PM
furious_a said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/10/15, 1:15 PM
furious_a said...: I remember the last time the EPA caused a toxic spill this big.; 8/10/15, 1:16 PM
Hagar said...: Follow the Colorado Public Radio link for a better picture and explanation.

It looks like it was, not a dam, but the old mine entrance that was just blocked up with dirt and miscellaneous materials when the mine was abandoned in 1923. Probably not even thinking about water, but unusually considerate for that time, blocked the entrance to keep people from entering and getting hurt. Then the mine has filled up with water over time, began leaking through the blockage, and the EPA sent a crew out to see if they could install a drainage pipe, having no idea of how much water there was in there and how high it stood.

It still seem to me that this was a matter for the Colorado Dept. of Mines and EID, not amateurs from the EPA.; 8/10/15, 1:20 PM
California Snow said...: The NPR comments are about as dumb as dumb gets. It's apparently the fault of capitalism now.; 8/10/15, 1:25 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "Then the mine has filled up with water over time, began leaking through the blockage, and the EPA sent a crew out to see if they could install a drainage pipe, having no idea of how much water there was in there and how high it stood."

-- I'm not an engineer, but I'm pretty sure "Hey, let's drain it all!" is a terrible plan when you can't answer what "it" is or how much "all" is.; 8/10/15, 1:26 PM
jacksonjay said...: averagejoe said:

LOL! LMAO! Nobody's madder than Obama about this... He's now trying to determine who's responsible so he knows whose ass he's going to kick... Most Transparent Administration Ever!

Hell, Obama doesn't know about this yet. He's on vacay and hasn't read a paper.; 8/10/15, 1:27 PM
Capitol Report New Mexico said...: You should add tags for "New Mexico" and "Navajo Nation." The Farmington (NM) Daily Times has a long story today. See http://www.daily-times.com. The Navajo are treating to sue the feds over the cleanup which suggests to me some interesting jurisdictional issues.; 8/10/15, 1:31 PM
Gusty Winds said...: Now it looks like a Butterscotch River.; 8/10/15, 1:49 PM
dbp said...: "problematic"; 8/10/15, 1:51 PM
Hagar said...: "Jurisdictional issues"?

The Navajos will sue to recover costs for supplying water to all those who have been told to stop using their wells until further notice. Water law on such issues is much older than the Federal Government.; 8/10/15, 2:10 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Heh. I love the comments. It's all God bless the EPA and damn the horrors of capitalism, the Tea Party, and multinational corporations.

People are funny.; 8/10/15, 2:12 PM
Howard said...: The EPA didn't create the waste. Where is the Capitalism Top. Men. who made millions by not dealing with the waste and relying on corporate socialism to fix their problem?; 8/10/15, 3:06 PM
Matt Sablan said...: Howard: The problem, actually, was temporarily dealt with. It wasn't an ideal solution, but until the government came along and fiddled, it was a working solution until a long-term solution could be devised.

Now, we have neither an unpleasant, but temporary, solution, or a long-term solution.; 8/10/15, 3:21 PM
Matt Sablan said...: [Though, I suppose, some might say that a nearly century-long solution might be considered "long-term."]; 8/10/15, 3:22 PM
Curious George said...: "Howard said...
The EPA didn't create the waste. Where is the Capitalism Top. Men. who made millions by not dealing with the waste and relying on corporate socialism to fix their problem?"

Since the mine was closed in 1923 I'm assuming they're dead.; 8/10/15, 3:31 PM
Capitol Report New Mexico said...: This afternoon Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico will declare a state of emergency with regard to the EPA river waste spill. Colorado and the Navajo Nation have already declared a state of emergency.; 8/10/15, 4:27 PM
Larry J said...: Blogger Matthew Sablan said...
Heads at EPA should roll for this.

They should, but you and I both know that no one will get fired for this. "Mistakes were made."

I'd love for one or more of the presidential candidates to make an issue of the need to reform civil service laws so that it would be easier to hold government employees responsible and to be able to fire them when necessary. Yeah, I have a dream.; 8/10/15, 4:45 PM
mesquito said...: I heard about this on NPR, which did not mention EPA. I wasn't surprised; 8/10/15, 5:09 PM
Rusty said...: I wonder how much the EPA is going to charge the mining company to clean it up?; 8/10/15, 5:09 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: It's a win for conservatives because they hate the environment and will gloat over any bad publicity that can accrue to the EPA.; 8/10/15, 6:24 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "It's a win for conservatives because they hate the environment and will gloat over any bad publicity that can accrue to the EPA."

-- No. It's not a "win" for any body. But, go ahead. Assume bad faith in others; it's bound to make it easier to work together!; 8/10/15, 6:27 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: I have no idea what the conservatives' "faith" is when it comes to the environment, Matthew. After all, there was a conservative lawmaker who said that AGW was A-OK because God supposedly told Noah that he would only flood (or apparently, destroy) the world once.

Nixon's environmental initiatives were not of his choosing, but because pressure made it impossible for him not to act.

What sort of environmentalists disbelieve scientists over corporate profitability priorities?

If any conservative (other than Teddy Roosevelt, a "progressive", actually) does care about the environment you go ahead and show me the proof that they first didn't seek to clear it with the CFO of a company who convinced him that their profitability was more important.

Go ahead. Show it to me.

Because for the last 25 years the only environmental policy Republicans have been in favor of is the one that a corporate polluter said was what they'd support. And it started with Reagan tearing solar panels off the White House. Just to make a point.

Tell us what their point is nowadays, Matthew. I'm dying to hear it.

Literally.; 8/10/15, 6:51 PM
chickelit said...: In this case, the EPA failed a sort of Hypocritical Oath: First Do No Harm.; 8/10/15, 7:47 PM
chickelit said...: Everybody's talking about the cations released...what about the anions...phosphate, sulfate, cyanide?; 8/10/15, 7:56 PM
chickelit said...: Gusty Winds said...

Now it looks like a Butterscotch River.

The Gangue River -- flowing through Indian territory.; 8/10/15, 7:58 PM
pm317 said...: So who will 'police' the 'police'?; 8/10/15, 8:32 PM
dwick said...: 8/10/15, 6:51 PM
Rhythm and Balls said...

And it started with Reagan tearing solar panels off the White House. Just to make a point.

Good lord... is this hoary tale still knocking around the left-wing loonysphere. I blasted Thom Hartmann on it years ago and even he stopped repeating it.

Once again, the White House solar panels were removed in 1986 for roof repairs: http://www.nytimes.com/1986/08/24/us/white-house-will-not-replace-solar-water-heating-system.html

By 1986, oil was once again cheap and abundant so any cost-savings the solar panels may have provided was swamped by the expense of reinstalling them.

According to most of you lib-prog types who begin foaming at the mouth at the mere mention of his name, Reagan was so addled by 1986 that there's no way he'd have been thinking of something so trivial as solar panels. And if he wasn't addled, he still had a lot more important things on his mind like the upcoming summit with Gorbachev in Reykjavik, Libya, immigration, etc.

So much for your 'point'...; 8/10/15, 8:57 PM
Rusty said...: Rhythm and Balls said...
I have no idea what the conservatives' "faith" is when it comes to the environment,

ritmo goes full moron on the environment.; 8/10/15, 9:27 PM
Humperdink said...: I live and work in oil country. If there is a spill, the first call is made to the DEP (the state version of the EPA). The DEP's first question is always the same: "is the spill contained?".

Sadly, the EPA's answer on this one is a rather emphatic no.; 8/10/15, 9:27 PM
sdharms said...: the epa tells industry that "dilution is not the solution" for hazardous waste. And they tell us now that it is. Heads should roll? No, draw and quarter is too good for them.; 8/10/15, 10:02 PM
Matt Sablan said...: "What sort of environmentalists disbelieve scientists over corporate profitability priorities?"

-- The kind that believe the myths related to fracking.; 8/11/15, 5:56 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Also: Most conservatives I know are for protecting the environment. They simply don't believe the right way to do it is through government methods that do things like create droughts in California and zone away the possibility of building taller buildings so we can house people cheaper in cities or creating windmills that are not as efficient and kill endangered birds.

Conservatives can be, and often are, environmentalists. People on the left just, as R&B did here, choose to ignore their existent and impugn their motives. There's no point in arguing with someone who pretends you don't even exist and, if you dare intrude on their bubble, insist you have some ulterior motive for seemingly not being the evil Saturday morning villain they know you to be.; 8/11/15, 6:01 AM
Rusty said...: You want to help the environment? Buy a hunting and/or fishing license. All those fees for licenses and stamps go directly to conservation. There is a special tax on guns ammunition , bows and arrows that goes directly to conservation. So when you write out that hundred dollars to Greenpeace, head out to the post office and buy a $15.00 duck stamp. Your $15.00 will do more to save the planet than anything Greenpeace does.; 8/11/15, 7:58 AM
Larry J said...: Most conservatives I know are for protecting the environment.

Like many here, I grew up in the 1960s when there were few anti-pollution laws. No one who remembers that time wants to go back to the pollution levels we had then. Despite what many of the greens tell you, things were much worse back then. The problem is that the first priority of any bureaucracy is to perpetuate and expand itself. The EPA is no exception. They keep issuing new regulations every year that impose high costs for minimal improvement in the environment. They're way past the point of diminishing returns, which is one of the reasons why so many American corporations have moved their production overseas.; 8/11/15, 7:58 AM
Big Mike said...: And then there's this visual.; 8/11/15, 8:00 AM
mikee said...: The federal payments to remediate this federal failure will be HUGE. How I wish I owned a toxic clean-up company right now in that locale, and had a well-bribed bunch of bureaucrats in my phone's contact list.; 8/11/15, 10:35 AM