Isn't creosote basically harmless and put into construction wood? Isn't this found in common building materials for homes, and we're actually quite exposed to it very frequently?
I question how dire the creosote needs to be cleaned up if it's really not that hazardous. But I'm not an expert on this chemical or on the matter in general; just wondering if letting time and nature sort this one out is an option too.
Quote:
Creosote is a compound that was once used to preserve wood products such as railway ties and power poles, but it has since been linked to certain cancers and birth defects.
The part of this that I don't understand is they are hosting ticket holders in the Boyce Theatre but the media in the Saddledome. More ticket holders than media, more space in the dome...
The press conference will likely be in the small room at the Dome where they usually hold press conferences. It's not a very big room, but it's set up well for the media. The Boyce Theatre has big screens for A/V presentations.
There is a concert at the Saddledome tomorrow night, and as of Thursday night, the scoreboard and most of the LED panels around the ice had been removed, so it's not available for a big presentation to the public right now.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
Isn't creosote basically harmless and put into construction wood? Isn't this found in common building materials for homes, and we're actually quite exposed to it very frequently?
I question how dire the creosote needs to be cleaned up if it's really not that hazardous. But I'm not an expert on this chemical or on the matter in general; just wondering if letting time and nature sort this one out is an option too.
Are you thinking of pressure treated lumber? That's different stuff, and it's not soaked everywhere into the ground, like in the west village.
The part of this that I don't understand is they are hosting ticket holders in the Boyce Theatre but the media in the Saddledome. More ticket holders than media, more space in the dome...
Quite interesting that governments haven't united to clean up the site already. Like how can they just sit there and say yeah, there's a major environmental problem going on. But lets not do anything about it. Maybe it'll go away on it's own.
I think that's pretty much the Canadian government's philosophy on the Environment in general.
The Following User Says Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
I think that's pretty much the Canadian government's philosophy on the Environment in general.
It's also, pragmatically, not a signficant hazard in its current state. Just like asbestos isn't a hazard unless its floating around in the air. There are potentially hazardous environmental conditions all over and, as long as there are protections in place within the requirements of the various Acts, the conditions are tolerated. And not just by the CPC and every government before them but also by society, because $$$.
It's also, pragmatically, not a signficant hazard in its current state. Just like asbestos isn't a hazard unless its floating around in the air. There are potentially hazardous environmental conditions all over and, as long as there are protections in place within the requirements of the various Acts, the conditions are tolerated. And not just by the CPC and every government before them but also by society, because $$$.
Why the heck is everyone squawking about the cost of cleanup then? And the one alderman talking about the land having negative value due to the creosote? I don't pretend to be an expert, but it's hard to figure out the truth.
If it's not exactly the worst thing in the world, why spend a few hundred million on clean up? Just contain it, and voila.
How exactly is remidiation done on a site like this? My best guess would be literally digging out the entirety of the contaminated earth and taking it somewhere else to be treated, but I could be completely out to lunch on that.
How exactly is remidiation done on a site like this? My best guess would be literally digging out the entirety of the contaminated earth and taking it somewhere else to be treated, but I could be completely out to lunch on that.
That's pretty much how you do it. At least on the O&G side.
The property can't be developed without disturbing the contaminated soil. Then it becomes a hazard and must dealt with at that time. If the land is never developed all the property owner must do is monitor and ensure hazardous conditions don't develop. I'm not specifically knowledgeable about this property but someone posted in another thread that containment actions have already been taken to protect the river.
Why the heck is everyone squawking about the cost of cleanup then? And the one alderman talking about the land having negative value due to the creosote? I don't pretend to be an expert, but it's hard to figure out the truth.
If it's not exactly the worst thing in the world, why spend a few hundred million on clean up? Just contain it, and voila.
I don't think it will be (or should be) fully cleaned up. Rather the focus will be on ensuring that there are no health risks associated with the proposed development, and that transport of creosote into the Bow River is prevented. That might involve partial clean-up and engineered barriers or other measures.
Why the heck is everyone squawking about the cost of cleanup then? And the one alderman talking about the land having negative value due to the creosote? I don't pretend to be an expert, but it's hard to figure out the truth.
If it's not exactly the worst thing in the world, why spend a few hundred million on clean up? Just contain it, and voila.
It's all an option but will depend on what the land will be used for. No one is going to pay to strip the dirt and bring in clean fill if it's all going to be dug up for parkades.
They need to figure out the extent of the contamination is and what the eventual use will be. Because we know Live, Work, Play, the Live part could lead one to assume there will be a little more then concreting over the contaminated soil.
