As Hurricane Florence hits the Carolina’s it has become known to Americans that North Carolina has a lot of coal ash ponds, and billions of gallons of pig shit:
In North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and Georgia, millions of residents are bracing for the arrival of Hurricane Florence, which meteorologists are warning could unleash life-threatening storm surges and historic flooding across a wide swath of the East Coast. Even if the storm weakens, experts warn Hurricane Florence could kill thousands of farm animals and trigger catastrophic waste spills from sewage treatment plants, hog waste lagoons and chicken farms. Many of the factory hog farms in North Carolina store their waste by spraying it on nearby fields and neighborhoods, or by depositing it in lagoons that can overflow during hurricanes, causing the toxic pig manure to pour into nearby waterways.
For North Carolina, they could see their environment poisoned because of coal ash, as well:
As the East Coast prepares for Hurricane Florence to make landfall, fear is growing that the storm could result in catastrophic waste spills. Twenty-four toxic coal ash containment ponds in the path of the storm are at risk of flooding in the extreme rainfall.
North Carolina, like a lot of states, the state economics is that of profit over people, and this hurricane will show that caring about the environment is better than caring about money. The externalities of cleaning messes up costs less than if we had regulations on businesses that deal with toxic material.
Charles P. Pierce writes of this decision by states like North Carolina to care about business first:
..In our deregulatory era of business-friendly state economies, every major storm of the sort that's lining up outside the southeastern United States this week brings with it an environmental threat because of something that's already on land, waiting.
After Hurricane Harvey, the Houston Chronicle wrote about “the toxic onslaught” that occurred from the hurricane “was largely overshadowed.” This is because we talk and think about the first responders and the residents, which is obviously not a bad thing to do. It’s just that the toxic waste will always be apart of hurricanes.
Charles P. Pierce writes:
There were nine federal SuperFund sites in the direct path of Hurricane Katrina when it hit Louisiana. The Environmental Protection Agency (Remember those guys? They were important once.) monitored 247 SuperFund sites when Sandy visited New Jersey and New York City.
With Hurricane Harvey, the pollution started to become more understood roughly seven months after the hurricane.
The Houston Chronicle notes what was in the waste water, and how much:
Nearly half a billion gallons of industrial wastewater mixed with stormwater surged out of just one chemical plant in Baytown, east of Houston on the upper shores of Galveston Bay.
Benzene, vinyl chloride, butadiene and other known human carcinogens were among the dozens of tons of industrial chemicals released throughout Houston’s petrochemical corridor and surrounding neighborhoods and waterways following Harvey’s torrential rains.
In all, reporters cataloged more than 100 Harvey-related toxic releases — on land, in water and air. Most were never publicized, and in the case of two of the biggest releases, Arkema and Magellan, the extent or potential toxicity was initially understated.
And not enough action is being undertaken:
Only a handful of the industrial spills have been investigated by federal regulators, the news organizations found. Texas regulators say they have investigated 89 incidents, but they have yet to announce any enforcement action. Testing by state and federal regulators of soil and water for contaminants was largely limited to Superfund toxic waste sites.
Based on widespread air monitoring, including flyovers, officials repeatedly assured the public that post-Harvey air pollution posed no health threat. But the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency official in charge now says these general assessments did not necessarily reflect local “hotspots” with potential risk to people.
The reality is, North Carolina could have a catastrophic environmental situation on their hands. Maybe this will make them think differently about regulation policies, and care about the environment. Which is embarrassing enough, but it’s doubtful that’s going happen. After all, North Carolina passed a law against studying sea-level rise in the state.
“If your science gives you a result you don’t like, pass a law saying the result is illegal,” said Stephen Colbert on his Comedy Central show back in June, of 2012. “Problem solved.”
It makes you wonder if North Carolina politicians will take the same approach for the environmental disaster that will come from flooding? My guess, and it’s not much of one. North Carolina will try to hide the evidence as best as they can, and our culture will allow it.
Comments