Download Early history - Net Start Class

Love Canal Summary
Love Canal is a neighborhood in Niagara Falls, New York, which became the subject of national
and international attention, controversy, and eventual environmental notoriety following the
discovery of 21,000 tons of toxic waste that had been buried beneath the neighborhood by
Hooker Chemical..
Hooker Chemical sold this site to the Niagara Falls School Board with a deed explicitly detailing
the danger contained within the site[citation needed], and including a liability limitation clause about the
contamination. The construction efforts of housing development, combined with particularly heavy
rainstorms, released the chemical waste, leading to a public health emergency and an urban
planning scandal
Early history
The name Love Canal came from the last name of William T. Love, who in the early 1890s
envisioned a canal connecting the two levels of the Niagara River separated by Niagara Falls. He
believed it would serve the area's burgeoning industries with much needed hydro electricity. His
plan was never realized. He began digging the canal and built a few streets and homes when his
fund were depleted
With the project abandoned, the canal gradually filled with water.[5] The local children swam there
in the summer and skated in the winter. By the 1940s, Hooker Electrochemical Company (later
known as Hooker Chemical Company) founded by Elon Hooker, began searching for a place to
dump the rampant amount of chemical waste it was producing. Hooker was granted permission
by the Niagara Power and Development Company in 1942 to dump wastes in the canal. The
canal was drained and lined with thick clay. Into this site, Hooker began placing 55-gallon metal
or fibre barrels. The City of Niagara Falls and the army continued the dumping of refuse..
This dumpsite was in operation until 1953. During this time, 21,000 tons of chemicals such as
"caustics, alkalines, fatty acids and chlorinated hydrocarbons from the manufacturing of dyes,
perfumes, solvents for rubber and synthetic resins" were added After 1953, the canal was
covered with soil, and vegetation began to grow atop the dumpsite.
Sale of the site
At the time of the dump's closure, Niagara Falls was entering an economic boom and the
population had surpassed 85,000, with the population expanding at record percentages. The
Niagara Falls City School District needed land to build new schools, and attempted to purchase
the property from Hooker Chemical that had been used to bury toxic waste. The corporation
refused to sell, citing safety concerns, and took members of the school board to the canal and
drilled several bore holes to demonstrate that there were toxic chemicals below the surface.
However, the board refused to capitulate.[10] Eventually, faced with the property being condemned
and/or expropriated, Hooker Chemical agreed to sell on the condition that the board buy the
entire property for one dollar. In the agreement signed on April 28, 1953, Hooker included a
seventeen line caveat that explained the dangers of building on the site. Hooker believed it was
thus released from all legal obligations should lawsuits arise in the future.[11]
Hooker stated that the area should be sealed off "so as to prevent the possibility of persons or
animals coming in contact with the dumped materials."[12]
Construction of the 93rd Street School and the 99th Street School
Despite the disclaimer, the board began construction of the 99th Street School in its originally
intended location. Upon completion in 1955, 400 children attended the school, and it opened
along with several other schools that had been built to accommodate students.. That same year,
a twenty-five foot area crumbled exposing toxic chemical drums, which then filled with water
during rainstorms. This created large puddles that children enjoyed playing in. [2]
In 1958, a second school, the 93rd Street School, opened six blocks away. In 1957, the City of
Niagara Falls constructed sewers for a mixture of low-income and single family residences be
built on lands adjacent to the landfill site. The school district had sold off the remaining land, and
homes were to be built by private developers, as well as the Niagara Falls Housing Authority, who
planned to build the Griffon Manor housing project.
Health problems, activism, and site cleanup
Reporter Michael Brown investigated potential health effects by carrying forth an informal door-todoor survey in the early summer of 1978, finding birth defects and many anomalies. On August 2,
1978, Lois Gibbs, a local mother, began to further rally homeowners. Her son, Michael Gibbs,
began attending school in September 1977. He developed epilepsy in December, suffered from
asthma and a urinary tract infection, and had a low white blood cell count,[17][18] all associated with
his exposure to the leaking chemical waste. Gibbs had learned from Mr. Brown that her
neighborhood sat on top of 21,000 tons of buried chemical waste.[19]
According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 1979, residents
exhibited a "disturbingly high rate of miscarriages... In one case, two out of four children in a
single Love Canal family had birth defects; one girl was born deaf with a cleft palate, an extra row
of teeth, and slight retardation, and a boy was born with an eye defect.[21] A survey conducted
by the Love Canal Homeowners Association found that 56% of the children born from
1974-1978 had at least one birth defect.[22]
. The school was closed and demolished, but both the school board and the chemical company
refused to accept liability. The 93rd Street School was closed some two years later due to
concerns about seeping toxic waste..
By 1978, Love Canal had become a national media event with articles referring to the
neighborhood as "a public health time bomb," and "one of the most appalling environmental
tragedies in American history." On August 7, 1978, United States President Jimmy Carter
announced a federal health emergency, called for the allocation of federal funds and ordered the
Federal Disaster Assistance Agency to assist the City of Niagara Falls to remedy the Love Canal
site.[26] This was the first time in American history that emergency funds were used other than for
a natural disaster.[27]
[Aftermath
Today, houses in the residential areas on the east and west sides of the canal have been
demolished. All that remains on the west side are abandoned residential streets. Some older east
side residents, whose houses stand alone in the demolished neighborhood, chose to stay. It was
estimated that less than 90 of the original 900 families opted to remain.[26] They were willing to
remain as long as they were guaranteed that their homes were in a relatively safe area.
The legacy of the disaster spawned a fictionalized made-for-TV film entitled Lois Gibbs and the
Love Canal (1982). A documentary entitled In Our Own Backyard was released in the U.S. in
1983
EXXON VALDEZ SUMMARY
The Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred in Prince William Sound, Alaska, on March 24, 1989, when
the Exxon Valdez, an oil tanker bound for Long Beach, California, struck Prince William Sound's
Bligh Reef and spilled 260,000 to 750,000 barrels (41,000 to 119,000 m 3) of crude oil.[1][2] It is
considered to be one of the most devastating human-caused environmental disasters.[3] As
significant as the Valdez spill was—the largest ever in U.S. waters until the 2010 Deepwater
Horizon oil spill—it ranks well down on the list of the world's largest oil spills in terms of volume
released.[4] However, Prince William Sound's remote location, accessible only by helicopter,
plane and boat, made government and industry response efforts difficult and severely taxed
existing plans for response. The region is a habitat for salmon, sea otters, seals and seabirds.
The oil, originally extracted at the Prudhoe Bay oil field, eventually covered 1,300 miles
(2,100 km) of coastline,[5] and 11,000 square miles (28,000 km 2) of ocean.[6]
Timeline of events
Exxon Valdez left the Valdez oil terminal in Alaska at 9:12 pm on March 23, 1989, bound for Long
Beach, California. The ship was under the control of Shipmaster Joseph Jeffrey Hazelwood. The
outbound shipping lane was obstructed with small icebergs (possibly from the nearby Columbia
Glacier), so Hazelwood got permission from the Coast Guard to go out through the inbound lane..
The ship was on autopilot, using the navigation system installed by the company that constructed
the ship. The ship struck Bligh Reef at around 12:04 a.m. March 24, 1989.[5]
According to official reports, the ship was carrying approximately 55 million US gallons (210,000
m3) of oil, of which about 11 to 32 million US gallons (42,000 to 120,000 m 3) were spilled into the
Prince William Sound.[
Identified causes
Multiple factors have been identified as contributing to the incident:



Exxon Shipping Company failed to supervise the master and provide a rested and
sufficient crew for Exxon Valdez. The NTSB found this was wide spread throughout
industry, prompting a safety recommendation to Exxon and to the industry. [13]
The third mate failed to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue or
excessive workload.[13]
Exxon Shipping Company failed to properly maintain the Raytheon Collision Avoidance
System (RAYCAS) radar, which, if functional, would have indicated to the third mate an
impending collision with the Bligh reef by detecting the "radar reflector", placed on the
next rock inland from Bligh Reef for the purpose of keeping boats on course via radar. [14]
CLEAN UP EFFORTS
Exxon was widely criticized for its slow response to cleaning up the disaster and John Devens,
the mayor of Valdez, has said his community felt betrayed by Exxon's inadequate response to the
crisis.[21] More than 11,000 Alaska residents, along with some Exxon employees, worked
throughout the region to try to restore the environment.
Because Prince William Sound contained many rocky coves where the oil collected, the decision
was made to displace it with high-pressure hot water. However, this also displaced and destroyed
the microbial populations on the shoreline; many of these organisms (e.g. plankton) are the basis
of the coastal marine food chain, and others (e.g. certain bacteria and fungi) are capable of
facilitating the biodegradation of oil. At the time, both scientific advice and public pressure was to
clean everything, but since then, a much greater understanding of natural and facilitated
remediation processes has developed, due somewhat in part to the opportunity presented for
study by the Exxon Valdez spill. Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, less than ten percent of
the oil was recovered and a study conducted by NOAA determined that as of early 2007 more
than 26 thousand U.S. gallons (98 m3) of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated
shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4% per year.[22][23]
Effects of Spill
Both the long-term and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied.[25] Immediate effects
included the deaths of, at the best estimates[citation needed], 100,000 to as many as 250,000
seabirds, at least 2,800 sea otters, approximately 12 river otters, 300 harbor seals, 247 Bald
Eagles, and 22 orcas, as well as the destruction of billions of salmon and herring eggs. [8][26] The
effects of the spill continued to be felt for many years [quantify] afterwards. Overall reductions in
population were seen in various ocean animals, including stunted growth in pink salmon
populations.
According to several studies funded by the state of Alaska, the spill had both short-term and longterm economic effects. These included the loss of recreational sports, fisheries, reduced tourism,
and an estimate of what economists call "existence value", which is the value to the public of a
pristine Prince William Sound.[46][47][48]
The economy of the city of Cordova, Alaska was adversely affected after the spill damaged
stocks of salmon and herring in the area. Several residents, including one former mayor,
committed suicide after the spill
Alaska regulations
In the aftermath of the spill, Alaska governor Steve Cowper issued an executive order requiring
two tugboats to escort every loaded tanker from Valdez out through Prince William Sound to
Hinchinbrook Entrance. As the plan evolved in the 1990s, one of the two routine tugboats was
replaced with a 210-foot (64 m) Escort Response Vehicle (ERV). The majority of tankers at
Valdez are no longer single-hulled, Congress has enacted legislation requiring all tankers to be
double-hulled by 2015.
The Exxon Valdez supertanker was towed to San Diego, arriving on July 10. Repairs began on
July 30. Approximately 1,600 short tons (1,500 t) of steel were removed and replaced. In June
1990 the tanker, renamed S/R Mediterranean, left harbor after $30 million of repairs.[42] It was still
sailing as of January 2010, registered in Panama. The vessel is currently owned by a Hong Kong
company, who operates it under the name Dong Fang Ocean.
THE GREAT PACIFIC GARBAGE PATCH SUMMARY
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, also described as the Pacific Trash Vortex, is a gyre of marine
litter in the central North Pacific Ocean located roughly between 135° to 155°W to 42°N.[1] The
patch extends over an indeterminate area, with estimates ranging very widely depending on the
degree of plastic concentration used to define the affected area. Although many media and
advocacy reports have suggested the patch extends over an area larger than the continental U.S,
recent research sponsored by the National Science Foundation suggests the affected area may
be twice the size of Texas.
The Patch is characterized by exceptionally high concentrations of pelagic plastics, chemical
sludge, and other debris that have been trapped by the currents of the North Pacific Gyre
DISCOVERY
The existence of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch was predicted in a 1988 paper published by
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the United States. The
prediction was based on results obtained by several Alaska-based researchers between 1985
and 1988 that measured neustonic plastic in the North Pacific Ocean.[7] This research found high
concentrations of marine debris accumulating in regions governed by ocean currents.
FORMATION
Like other areas of concentrated marine debris in the world's oceans, it is thought, the Great
Pacific Garbage Patch formed gradually as a result of marine pollution gathered by oceanic
currents.[14] The garbage patch occupies a large and relatively stationary region of the North
Pacific Ocean bound by the North Pacific Gyre (a remote area commonly referred to as the horse
latitudes). The gyre's rotational pattern draws in waste material from across the North Pacific
Ocean, including coastal waters off North America and Japan. As material is captured in the
currents, wind-driven surface currents gradually move floating debris toward the center, trapping
it in the region.
SIZE
The size of the patch is unknown, as large items readily visible from a boat deck are uncommon.
Most debris consists of small plastic particles suspended at or just below the surface, making it
impossible to detect by aircraft or satellite. Instead, the size of the patch is determined by
sampling. Estimates on size range from 700,000 square kilometres (270,000 sq mi) to more than
15,000,000 square kilometres (5,800,000 sq mi)
In August 2009, the Scripps Institution of Oceanography / Project Kaisei SEAPLEX survey
mission of the Gyre, found that plastic debris was present in 100 consecutive samples taken at
varying depths and net sizes along a 1,700 miles (2,700 km) path through the patch. The survey
also confirmed that while the debris field does contain large pieces, it is on the whole made up of
smaller items which increase in concentration towards the Gyre's centre, and these 'confetti-like'
pieces are clearly visible just beneath the surface.
SOURCES OF POLLUTANTS
There is strong scientific data concerning the origins of pelagic plastics. The figure that an
estimated 80% of the garbage comes from land-based sources and 20% from ships, is derived
from an unsubstantiated estimate.[17] Ship-generated pollution is a source of concern since a
typical 3,000 passenger cruise ship produces over eight tons of solid waste weekly, a major
amount of which ends up in the patch, as most of the waste is organic. [18] Pollutants range in size
from abandoned fishing nets to micro-pellets used in abrasive cleaners.[19] Currents carry debris
from the west coast of North America to the gyre in about six years,[20] and debris from the east
coast of Asia in a year or less.[21][22] An international research project led by Dr. Hideshige Takada
of Tokyo University studying plastic pellets, or nurdles, from beaches around the world may
provide further clues about the origins of pelagic plastic.[23]
EFFECT ON WILDLIFE
Some of these long-lasting plastics end up in the stomachs of marine birds and animals, and their
young,[9] including sea turtles and the Black-footed Albatross.[29] Besides the particles' danger to
wildlife, the floating debris can absorb organic pollutants from seawater, including PCBs, DDT,
and PAHs.[30] Aside from toxic effects,[31] when ingested, some of these are mistaken by the
endocrine system as estradiol, causing hormone disruption in the affected animal.[29] These toxincontaining plastic pieces are also eaten by jellyfish, which are then eaten by larger fish. Many of
these fish are then consumed by humans, resulting in their ingestion of toxic chemicals. [32] Marine
plastics also facilitate the spread of invasive species that attach to floating plastic in one region
and drift long distances to colonize other ecosystems.[19]
Research has shown that this plastic marine debris affects at least 267 species worldwide and a
few of the 267 species reside in the North Pacific Gyre. [33]
CLEAN-UP.
In April 2008, Richard Sundance Owen, a building contractor and scuba dive instructor, formed
the Environmental Cleanup Coalition to address the issue of North Pacific pollution. ECC
collaborates with other groups to identify methods to safely remove plastic and persistent organic
pollutants from the oceans.[36][37]
The JUNK raft project was a trans-Pacific sailing voyage from June to August 2008 made to
highlight the plastic in the patch, organized by the Algalita Marine Research Foundation.[38][39][40]
Project Kaisei is a project to study and clean up the garbage patch launched in March 2009. In
August 2009 two project vessels, the New Horizon and the Kaisei, embarked on a voyage to
research the patch and determine the feasibility of commercial scale collection and recycling. [41]
THERE IS STILL LITTLE CLEAN-UP BEING DONE SINCE THIS IS A FAIRLY RECENT
DISCOVERY