Storm Warnings: Will the Toxic Cleanup be Politicized?

[Guest guest]

COMMENTARY

Storm Warnings: Will the Toxic Cleanup be Politicized?

By Jim Motavalli

http://www.emagazine.com/view/?2883

My cousin, Mark, is an English professor at Tulane

University in New Orleans. Her home on Pine Street is only a few

blocks from the historic university, and from what she's heard it

took on three and a half feet of water.

When hurricane victims are finally able to return to their homes,

they may have to face an onslaught of mold and dangerously polluted

water.

Fortunately, says Mark, now living temporarily in Florida and

planning an indefinite stay in Virginia, her house is one of the few

in her neighborhood with a basement. She says that makes her

relatively " lucky, " because the basement may collect the excess

water, keeping it from ruining the rest of her house. (A

spokesperson with the National Flood Insurance Program confirms this

may be the case, but he says it is also entirely possible that

basement flooding could seriously damage a home's foundation,

depending on various factors). But with the waters receding, Mark

faces a stark choice: Should she return as soon as the authorities

will let her, or will that choice expose her and her 11-year-old son

to environmental toxins that the government neglected to tell her

about?

" It's a polluted, contaminated and toxic environment, " Mark says. " I

have a friend who is moving back in town, and she says, 'What toxins

can be there that are worse than what was already there?' But we

have to worry about mold breeding in the sheetrock, about dangerous

water quality, about air pollution. Is it safe to bring an 11-year-

old boy back in there? We want the latest scientific information. We

want to be assured that there will be monitoring. What happened to

the Cancer Alley chemical plants? Weren't they flooded? We don't

want to be told in 25 years that the reason we all got horrible

diseases was because of our exposure in the wake of the storm. "

Millions of Gulf Coast residents face difficult choices like this,

and the federal government could help with clear information about

toxic threats and advice on how people should cope as the rebuilding

effort gets underway. Unfortunately, Congress and the Bush

administration seem more concerned with image building and with

scoring political points than in assisting the citizenry. Meanwhile,

the Environmental Protection Agency is coming under withering

criticism for its failure to provide timely data.

The Society of Environmental Journalists says that reporters " are

having an increasingly difficult time using the Freedom of

Information Act to drag information out of the federal government to

shed light on Superfund sites, chemical factories, mining accidents

and a host of other topics important to citizens. "

Hugh Kaufman, an EPA senior policy analyst and whistle-blower, says

the agency has failed to provide clear information on the location

and danger of chemicals that leaked into New Orleans communities.

EPA, he said, " has [either] become totally incompetent at water

testing, or there is a cover-up. " Sorvalis of OMB Watch said

to BushGreenwatch, " EPA does not appear to be testing for chemicals

related to the petrochemical and oil industries, including diesel

and byproducts of petrochemical refining. These are chemicals you

would expect EPA to test for. "

The chemicals present in New Orleans at the time of the storm

represent a real witch's brew. According to the National

Environmental Trust, " These industrial chemicals range from

formaldehyde to benzene to cyanide compounds and include

neurotoxins, carcinogens and reproductive and developmental toxins.

All chemicals listed were present in significant quantities and

could pose serious short- and long-term public health risks if they

have leaked. "

You won't get this kind of warning from the feds. EPA has posted

data from New Orleans flood water samples indicating high levels of

E. coli bacteria, advising residents " to avoid human contact with

flood water when possible. " But, of course, many thousands of city

residents were chest deep in the stuff for days at a time.

Louisiana's state Department of Environmental Quality, notorious in

the past for its easy licensing and lax monitoring of polluters,

said last week that air quality " is not a concern right now. " The

DEQ's Roberie added, however, that " pathogens and molds are a

different issue, as well as asbestos and lead as demolitions begin.

We have not seen anything of great concern, as you would expect when

you evacuate the city. " Meanwhile, the Baton Rouge Advocate reported

concern about benzene and xylene levels above short-term and chronic

exposure limits near the site of an oil spill and fire.

Ivor van Heerden, head of a Louisiana State University center that

studies the public health fallout from hurricanes, told the Times of

London that gasoline, antifreeze, bleach, human waste, acids,

alcohols and " a host of other substances " will have been washed

through populated neighborhoods, requiring extensive cleaning.

Dennis McGuire, Chief Technology Officer of Ecosphere Technologies

(which makes an EPA-verified, large-scale mobile filtration system),

adds, " We already know that the water in New Orleans is contaminated

with sewage, fuel, deadly bacteria and lead. With an amount this

size, all they have to do is look at the harbors in places like New

York City that dump fuels and petroleum products to see the loss of

marine life, the estuary system—and that's where the whole food

chain starts. The EPA knows the technology exists to pump clean,

filtered water out of New Orleans, but they apparently just want to

move polluted water. "

These chemicals will aggravate existing health conditions, including

asthma. Dr. lin Adkinson, a leading allergist at the s

Hopkins School of Medicine, warns that " New Orleans asthma will come

back with a vengeance when the city is livable once again. Flooding

of homes in warm climates can accelerate the growth of mold that can

be very difficult to get rid of. And, as with other tragic

consequences of the breakdown of levees, the poor will suffer the

most since they have little or no resources to combat the problem. "

Mold is a truly dangerous threat. The website Mold-Help.org quotes

Doug Rice, a mold expert and director of Colorado State University's

Environmental Quality Laboratory. " It's going to be incredible, "

Rice says. " We're going to have quite the lab experiment going on

there. " A critical factor is continuing high humidity related to the

lack of air conditioning. " If they don't have electricity for two or

three months, that's going to be a problem, " said Rice, who had

added that 1999's Hurricane Floyd in North Carolina had

produced " incredible " mold growth after parts of the state sat

underwater for weeks, and that New Orleans will be worse.

Mold susceptibility will vary throughout the city, the Wall Street

Journal reports, with the biggest threat to older houses (often in

poorer neighborhoods) built before 1972. These homes were built with

plywood panels that are not fully water-resistant. " It is imperative

to dry out a flooded house quickly, but that could prove difficult

in the heat and humidity of Louisiana, " the newspaper concluded with

some understatement.

According to the Boston Globe, " After floods, federal agencies often

urge homeowners to strip homes of wet carpets and furniture and dry

the building out within 48 hours to stop mold infestation--but there

are no guidelines for what to do with a house that has been partly

submerged for weeks….'The mold will get into the cracks in the

ceiling, behind the paint,' said McGinnis, director of the

Medical Mycology Research Center at the University of Texas Medical

Branch in Galveston. 'It really creates difficulty because there is

going to be lots and lots of mold growing.' "

The Bush administration and Congressional Republicans seem to have

something other than mold on their minds. A blizzard of bills and

executive actions are designed to relax regulatory " burdens " that

the President and these lawmakers had long opposed, using the storm

as a fig leaf. Among other things, says MSNBC, these bills will (or

would if passed):

• Suspend federal fuel standards designed to combat high ozone and

sulfur emissions;

• Relax the requirement that petroleum be transported on U.S.-

flagged ships while in U.S. coastal waters;

• Waive rules limiting the number of consecutive hours truckers

carrying fuel can drive;

• Suspend -Bacon Act provisions requiring the federal

government to pay " prevailing wages " on storm-related construction

sites;

• Open up vast areas of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, currently

under a federal moratorium, to oil and gas exploration.

Meanwhile, a Senate committee went on a fishing expedition last

week, asking the Justice Department to investigate whether greens

were really responsible for the damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina.

As Our Planet reported last week, an article appearing on National

Review Online charged environmental groups with impeding levee

reconstruction. The groups fired back, pointing out that the

lawsuits had nothing to do with the levees holding back Lake

Pontchartrain. Nevertheless, a Senate committee headed by Senator

Inhofe (R-OK) reportedly asked the Justice Department to

investigate, resulting in an e-mail to U.S. attorneys' offices

asking for information on " environmental groups seeking to block or

otherwise impede the [Army] Corps' work on the levees protecting New

Orleans. "

As the New York Times reported, Inhofe also introduced legislation

that would allow the EPA to suspend any law governing air, water or

land if it related to Hurricane Katrina. But a key member of

Inhofe's Senate Environment Committee, Jeffords (I-VT),

opposed the legislation, saying, " We should be focusing our energy

on protecting the health and safety of people impacted by the

hurricane, not paving the way for environmental abuse. "

O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch called Inhofe's bill " a blank check to

ignore crucial health and environmental protections. "

The public is already fired up over the Bush administration's

handling of Hurricane Katrina. If it finds the administration

botched the cleanup for short-term political gains and hidden

agendas, it could get even more angry.

Scollan and Jayasudha ph contributed editorial research.

CONTACT:

Clean Air Watch

Mold-Help.org

[Guest guest]

I just love down there at the bottom where the guy asks to suspend

all environmental laws in places affected by Katrina!! We only

suspend laws when it concerns our health! We really need a

government where the people who lie their way in are accountable for

their atrocities on mankind!!

, " tigerpaw2c " <tigerpaw2c@y...> wrote:

> COMMENTARY

> Storm Warnings: Will the Toxic Cleanup be Politicized?

> By Jim Motavalli

>

> http://www.emagazine.com/view/?2883

>

> My cousin, Mark, is an English professor at Tulane

> University in New Orleans. Her home on Pine Street is only a few

> blocks from the historic university, and from what she's heard it

> took on three and a half feet of water.

>

>

> When hurricane victims are finally able to return to their homes,

> they may have to face an onslaught of mold and dangerously polluted

> water.

> Fortunately, says Mark, now living temporarily in Florida and

> planning an indefinite stay in Virginia, her house is one of the

few

> in her neighborhood with a basement. She says that makes her

> relatively " lucky, " because the basement may collect the excess

> water, keeping it from ruining the rest of her house. (A

> spokesperson with the National Flood Insurance Program confirms

this

> may be the case, but he says it is also entirely possible that

> basement flooding could seriously damage a home's foundation,

> depending on various factors). But with the waters receding, Mark

> faces a stark choice: Should she return as soon as the authorities

> will let her, or will that choice expose her and her 11-year-old

son

> to environmental toxins that the government neglected to tell her

> about?

>

> " It's a polluted, contaminated and toxic environment, " Mark

says. " I

> have a friend who is moving back in town, and she says, 'What

toxins

> can be there that are worse than what was already there?' But we

> have to worry about mold breeding in the sheetrock, about dangerous

> water quality, about air pollution. Is it safe to bring an 11-year-

> old boy back in there? We want the latest scientific information.

We

> want to be assured that there will be monitoring. What happened to

> the Cancer Alley chemical plants? Weren't they flooded? We don't

> want to be told in 25 years that the reason we all got horrible

> diseases was because of our exposure in the wake of the storm. "

>

> Millions of Gulf Coast residents face difficult choices like this,

> and the federal government could help with clear information about

> toxic threats and advice on how people should cope as the

rebuilding

> effort gets underway. Unfortunately, Congress and the Bush

> administration seem more concerned with image building and with

> scoring political points than in assisting the citizenry.

Meanwhile,

> the Environmental Protection Agency is coming under withering

> criticism for its failure to provide timely data.

>

> The Society of Environmental Journalists says that reporters " are

> having an increasingly difficult time using the Freedom of

> Information Act to drag information out of the federal government

to

> shed light on Superfund sites, chemical factories, mining accidents

> and a host of other topics important to citizens. "

>

> Hugh Kaufman, an EPA senior policy analyst and whistle-blower, says

> the agency has failed to provide clear information on the location

> and danger of chemicals that leaked into New Orleans communities.

> EPA, he said, " has [either] become totally incompetent at water

> testing, or there is a cover-up. " Sorvalis of OMB Watch said

> to BushGreenwatch, " EPA does not appear to be testing for chemicals

> related to the petrochemical and oil industries, including diesel

> and byproducts of petrochemical refining. These are chemicals you

> would expect EPA to test for. "

>

> The chemicals present in New Orleans at the time of the storm

> represent a real witch's brew. According to the National

> Environmental Trust, " These industrial chemicals range from

> formaldehyde to benzene to cyanide compounds and include

> neurotoxins, carcinogens and reproductive and developmental toxins.

> All chemicals listed were present in significant quantities and

> could pose serious short- and long-term public health risks if they

> have leaked. "

>

> You won't get this kind of warning from the feds. EPA has posted

> data from New Orleans flood water samples indicating high levels of

> E. coli bacteria, advising residents " to avoid human contact with

> flood water when possible. " But, of course, many thousands of city

> residents were chest deep in the stuff for days at a time.

>

> Louisiana's state Department of Environmental Quality, notorious in

> the past for its easy licensing and lax monitoring of polluters,

> said last week that air quality " is not a concern right now. " The

> DEQ's Roberie added, however, that " pathogens and molds are a

> different issue, as well as asbestos and lead as demolitions begin.

> We have not seen anything of great concern, as you would expect

when

> you evacuate the city. " Meanwhile, the Baton Rouge Advocate

reported

> concern about benzene and xylene levels above short-term and

chronic

> exposure limits near the site of an oil spill and fire.

>

> Ivor van Heerden, head of a Louisiana State University center that

> studies the public health fallout from hurricanes, told the Times

of

> London that gasoline, antifreeze, bleach, human waste, acids,

> alcohols and " a host of other substances " will have been washed

> through populated neighborhoods, requiring extensive cleaning.

>

> Dennis McGuire, Chief Technology Officer of Ecosphere Technologies

> (which makes an EPA-verified, large-scale mobile filtration

system),

> adds, " We already know that the water in New Orleans is

contaminated

> with sewage, fuel, deadly bacteria and lead. With an amount this

> size, all they have to do is look at the harbors in places like New

> York City that dump fuels and petroleum products to see the loss of

> marine life, the estuary system—and that's where the whole food

> chain starts. The EPA knows the technology exists to pump clean,

> filtered water out of New Orleans, but they apparently just want to

> move polluted water. "

>

> These chemicals will aggravate existing health conditions,

including

> asthma. Dr. lin Adkinson, a leading allergist at the s

> Hopkins School of Medicine, warns that " New Orleans asthma will

come

> back with a vengeance when the city is livable once again. Flooding

> of homes in warm climates can accelerate the growth of mold that

can

> be very difficult to get rid of. And, as with other tragic

> consequences of the breakdown of levees, the poor will suffer the

> most since they have little or no resources to combat the problem. "

>

> Mold is a truly dangerous threat. The website Mold-Help.org quotes

> Doug Rice, a mold expert and director of Colorado State

University's

> Environmental Quality Laboratory. " It's going to be incredible, "

> Rice says. " We're going to have quite the lab experiment going on

> there. " A critical factor is continuing high humidity related to

the

> lack of air conditioning. " If they don't have electricity for two

or

> three months, that's going to be a problem, " said Rice, who had

> added that 1999's Hurricane Floyd in North Carolina had

> produced " incredible " mold growth after parts of the state sat

> underwater for weeks, and that New Orleans will be worse.

>

> Mold susceptibility will vary throughout the city, the Wall Street

> Journal reports, with the biggest threat to older houses (often in

> poorer neighborhoods) built before 1972. These homes were built

with

> plywood panels that are not fully water-resistant. " It is

imperative

> to dry out a flooded house quickly, but that could prove difficult

> in the heat and humidity of Louisiana, " the newspaper concluded

with

> some understatement.

>

> According to the Boston Globe, " After floods, federal agencies

often

> urge homeowners to strip homes of wet carpets and furniture and dry

> the building out within 48 hours to stop mold infestation--but

there

> are no guidelines for what to do with a house that has been partly

> submerged for weeks….'The mold will get into the cracks in the

> ceiling, behind the paint,' said McGinnis, director of the

> Medical Mycology Research Center at the University of Texas Medical

> Branch in Galveston. 'It really creates difficulty because there is

> going to be lots and lots of mold growing.' "

>

> The Bush administration and Congressional Republicans seem to have

> something other than mold on their minds. A blizzard of bills and

> executive actions are designed to relax regulatory " burdens " that

> the President and these lawmakers had long opposed, using the storm

> as a fig leaf. Among other things, says MSNBC, these bills will (or

> would if passed):

>

> • Suspend federal fuel standards designed to combat high ozone and

> sulfur emissions;

> • Relax the requirement that petroleum be transported on U.S.-

> flagged ships while in U.S. coastal waters;

> • Waive rules limiting the number of consecutive hours truckers

> carrying fuel can drive;

> • Suspend -Bacon Act provisions requiring the federal

> government to pay " prevailing wages " on storm-related construction

> sites;

> • Open up vast areas of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, currently

> under a federal moratorium, to oil and gas exploration.

>

>

> Meanwhile, a Senate committee went on a fishing expedition last

> week, asking the Justice Department to investigate whether greens

> were really responsible for the damage wrought by Hurricane

Katrina.

> As Our Planet reported last week, an article appearing on National

> Review Online charged environmental groups with impeding levee

> reconstruction. The groups fired back, pointing out that the

> lawsuits had nothing to do with the levees holding back Lake

> Pontchartrain. Nevertheless, a Senate committee headed by Senator

> Inhofe (R-OK) reportedly asked the Justice Department to

> investigate, resulting in an e-mail to U.S. attorneys' offices

> asking for information on " environmental groups seeking to block or

> otherwise impede the [Army] Corps' work on the levees protecting

New

> Orleans. "

>

> As the New York Times reported, Inhofe also introduced legislation

> that would allow the EPA to suspend any law governing air, water or

> land if it related to Hurricane Katrina. But a key member of

> Inhofe's Senate Environment Committee, Jeffords (I-VT),

> opposed the legislation, saying, " We should be focusing our energy

> on protecting the health and safety of people impacted by the

> hurricane, not paving the way for environmental abuse. "

> O'Donnell of Clean Air Watch called Inhofe's bill " a blank check to

> ignore crucial health and environmental protections. "

>

> The public is already fired up over the Bush administration's

> handling of Hurricane Katrina. If it finds the administration

> botched the cleanup for short-term political gains and hidden

> agendas, it could get even more angry.

>

> Scollan and Jayasudha ph contributed editorial research.

>

> CONTACT:

>

> Clean Air Watch

>

> Mold-Help.org