Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[salmonrook]

Its good that all these different people are getting samples and making independant conclusions ,it brings up discussion and keeps everyone honest.
  Lots of whitewash,spin and outright misinformation when it comes to environmental sampling and the government reporting.
Clearly this disaster is going to effect the ecology of the water, we wont know the long term effects obviously for the long term .Hopefully it doesnt affect the salmon stocks of the future which spawn and reproduce in these waters.

[shuswapsteve]

Have you actually looked at the links I posted and read the information provided?  Are you inferring that the current environmental sampling and government reporting on this incident is a "whitewash", "spin", and "outright misinformation"?  Are you challenging the water quality results collected to date because you believe they are a "whitewash", "spin" and "outright misinformation"?  If so, what basis do you have for this conclusion?

[salmonrook]

Yes I am challenging them .
 They show a bunch of lab results that suggest that what the substance is not a petrochemical but they dont actually have analysis of what the substance is,they stop short of identifying it ,just to say that biologist poked with a stick and came to the conclusion that it was organic.To me thats clearly whitewashing the issue.
  This is not a spill from  oil sands which would show a petrochemical sheen ,Its acid rock drainage and heavy metal leftovers,which would maybe even not show up on the surface of the water but may coat the bottom of the lake.
 

[shuswapsteve]

I am not saying it is not good to be suspicious, but many times people do not look for the simplest explanation first; instead, it has to be something mysterious because obviously no one like Morton can figure it out. The people involved with the analysis are experts in water quality. Do you have education and training in water quality?  It is probably not the first time they have encountered something similar.

The "poking with a stick" is getting interpreted as some archaic method whereas in actual fact some of the simplest field tests do not have to be done using thousands of dollars of equipment, but experience does help.  By doing this simple field test, it would determine if the sheen was petroleum or animal/plant decomposition. Based on their experience they then analyzed the sample for tannis and lignins which are components of plants and trees. The samples were taken to a private lab (ALS) for analysis. The testing determined that tannis and ligins were present.  If MOE suspected something else they likely would have had the lab test for it.  In addition, numerous water samples have already been taken from Quesnel Lake testing for a variety of parameters. Here is just a some of the many tests that have already been done to date:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/eemp/incidents/2014/mount-polley/pdf/20140904/Results-legal-August-20-DW.pdf
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/eemp/incidents/2014/mount-polley/pdf/20140904/Results-legal-August-20-AL.pdf

As Bob pointed out in the other thread, perhaps the MOE employees doing the sampling were going about it the right way:

http://www.algomapublichealth.com/userfiles/file/Iron%20Bacteria%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf

It's not as if they are hiding something because...again...others are free to go take as many samples of the lake water as they like.  In addition, others can use whatever lab they want to use if they believe lab technicians are getting paid to lie about the results. Think about it for a bit...if it was something mysterious and dangerous don't you think people like Morton would have said something by now considering she took her samples around the same time?  If it's something dangerous then being the responsible biologist Morton is I am sure she would have expedited the analysis of these samples and would have informed the people she claims to defend.  MOE posted the raw lab results for the public to see along with their written analysis.  MOE has even distributed sampling kits to First Nations and UNBC if they find this sheen again and want to take samples. So, I don't see where you are coming from when you say this is a whitewash.  In my opinion, the whitewash is being done by individuals who are not backing up their conclusions of something mysterious with evidence. Speculation is being masqueraded as fact which is misinformation.

Your conclusion is that its acid rock drainage and heavy metals leftovers, which may not show up on the surface of the water but may coat the bottom of the lake. If the tailings were alkaline (pH 8.5) what evidence leads you to believe that this sheen is acid rock drainage and heavy metals leftover?

[salmonrook]

If we are relying on scientists to determine if the water is safe to drink and if the fish are safe to live , then it should be quite a comprehensive test ,the "poking with a stick 'is the preliminary test.It should be tested to see what exactly it is ,we are being led to believe that this is a naturally occurring bacteria that was there before.
 The fact that they  observe thats its not petrochemical,but it has these components of organic material does nothing to identifiy the offending compounds.
  If you are inferring that the sheen,of which is minimal ,is not a result of the spill then you are the one spreading the misinformation .
 As for people taking water samples,sure they are thorough taking the samples its just the control of information and results that I disagree with.Keep in mind that the government is in the mining business.

If you look at the data you see that the level of copper contamination is 10 times that of what it should be,especiallly at several depths which is in line with what would happen to this compound if its suspended in water .Of course none of it will float on the surface ,any 1st year science student knows that.To me these are the dangerous and deadly compounds that will contaminate the water for fish and people alike.
 

[absolon]

"we are being led to believe that this is a naturally occurring bacteria that was there before"

Actually, you are being led to believe it isn't a naturally occurring bacteria but instead that it is some toxic chemical mix that will thoroughly and completely destroy the environment and all the creatures in it. Problem is that the accusation is completely unsubstantiated, comes from a source that has a real credibility problem in the scientific community, and that wants to convince you to dip into your pocket to support her ongoing escapades, or perhaps more accurately, crusades.

The testing is in competent hands and will take the time it takes to be done thoroughly and properly in spite of the bleatings of Ms. Morton.

[skaha]

--naturally occurring isn't always good.
--lets say for argument's sake that this isn't some toxic chemical waste from the mine...preliminary testing seems to support this assumption.
--if this has not occurred in the area before (I don't know that)... then the next avenue of investigation would be... was this naturally occurring bacteria pushed into the lake by the force created by the breach in the dam.
--naturally occurring... spread out and locked into organic material that has now been shoved into the lake in a concentration that has made obvious noteable changes.
--I am not doubting the probability that this has been caused by organic material from the area. When checking logging in wet belt areas I have seen on several occasions blue/green sheen that appeared on standing water and appeared to be caused by a fuel leak... of course we checked it and in most cases found that it was not.

--Having all that organic material flushed into the lake in a concentrated area if it is not dispersed by wind or water could reduce oxygen availability or cause algae blooms. Low oxygen and algae bloom areas have been problematic in other water bodies for schooling fish such as kokanee... a sockeye cousin. On the we may be OK side this is later in the season....cooler water temps...less sunlight thus the "Organic anomaly" may go away before it becomes an issue for fish.
-- And yes you could say that a "naturally occurring slide" could produce similar results. That doesn't mean we should accept it as OK.

[absolon]

I understand that it isn't necessarily harmless but starting from the unsubstantiated position that it is toxic and that the labs are disembling about their findings because of a conspiracy between government and the mining industry is both nonsense and textbook Morton.

I've no doubt partisan government and Imperial would like this to go away but there are enough competent non-partisan people monitoring the situation that problems aren't going to be swept under the rug. All the what-ifs are nothing but speculation about what may or may not occur; time and testing will provide the answers. Attacking the testing because it isn't providing the answers one says it should does nothing to establish the testing is flawed or establish any credibility for a thesis.

Fear mongering doesn't contribute to solving the problem; in this case it accomplishes nothing more than keeping Morton's name in the news and bolstering her own sense of relevance. As with Henny Penny, there are those who are quite willing to follow along, but it isn't a constructive exercise and won't change any of the facts on the ground.

[skaha]

--to be clear I do not have any doubt in the competence of the Lab being used by government or the staff/contractors collecting the samples.

--I don't have much confidence in those who think they can scoop up a sample in a coffee cup, send it to a lab and expect any kind of meaningful result. In fact it can be harmful by sidetracking and causing delay of the investigation.

[absolon]

I don't mean to be pointing a finger at you and edited a poor choice of word to reflect that.

There is, however, a certain element for whom everything becomes a conspiracy and who believe it is only incompetence which keeps the experts from agreeing with that thesis. Unfortunately, they are more obstacle than assistance in actually defining and dealing with the problems that result from something like this dam failure and it is that element my comments are addressed to.

[shuswapsteve]

If we are relying on scientists to determine if the water is safe to drink and if the fish are safe to live , then it should be quite a comprehensive test ,the "poking with a stick 'is the preliminary test.It should be tested to see what exactly it is ,we are being led to believe that this is a naturally occurring bacteria that was there before.
 The fact that they  observe thats its not petrochemical,but it has these components of organic material does nothing to identifiy the offending compounds.
  If you are inferring that the sheen,of which is minimal ,is not a result of the spill then you are the one spreading the misinformation .
 As for people taking water samples,sure they are thorough taking the samples its just the control of information and results that I disagree with.Keep in mind that the government is in the mining business.

If you look at the data you see that the level of copper contamination is 10 times that of what it should be,especiallly at several depths which is in line with what would happen to this compound if its suspended in water .Of course none of it will float on the surface ,any 1st year science student knows that.To me these are the dangerous and deadly compounds that will contaminate the water for fish and people alike.

By doing the test they did in the field they were able to narrow it down to what they felt it was. It was either petroleum or plant/animal decomposition.  It's floating on the surface and is not mixing with the water (not soluble in water).  Based on their experience they then had the sample analyzed for the presence of tannins and lignins which are components to look for if it's decomposition of plants and trees.  Following this field test, lab results confirmed the presence of tannins and lignins.  If they really thought it was something mysterious they would have tested for it.  Absolon said it best: Attacking the testing because it isn't providing the answers one says it should does nothing to establish the testing is flawed or establish any credibility for a thesis..

You are expecting some extensive comprehensive test or else the results are flawed.....and perhaps those techniques are used when applicable, but when they are not applicable it doesn't mean that the situation is not treated as seriously.  Those are the decisions made by professionals that deal with water quality. You're not an expert in that field yet you have come to the conclusion that a comprehensive test is warranted.  You are basically insinuating they do not know how to do their jobs but in actual fact you have no idea what the job entails.

Again, MOE is not closing the book on this. If more of this sheen can be found then more samples can be taken.  This not limited to government staff as First Nations and UNBC have been provided kits to conduct this sampling.  Morton, Suzuki, Staniford, or some homeless guy in Williams Lake (which can also be Staniford) can go take samples of this sheen and have it sampled at the lab of their choice.  You can do this also.  The evidence to date does not support that this sheen is from the spill.  On the other hand, you are making unsubstantiated claims that this is the result of the spill, but have not provided any evidence that supports that opinion - none.  That is misinformation.

You are now latching onto the copper concentrations from the water sampling results. While on that track, MOE has discussed the presence of copper in the samples:

It should be noted that the much lower concentrations of the dissolved form of copper as compared to the very high level of total copper concentrations indicates that the total levels are associated with particulates and may not be as bioavailable (i.e. available for uptake by aquatic life). Exceedances of acute guidelines such as copper indicate the potential for impact to aquatic life dependent upon the magnitude, duration and frequency of the exposure. - Deborah Epps, M.Sc., R.P. Bio.; Provincial Water Quality Section Head; Ministry of Environment
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/eemp/incidents/2014/mount-polley/pdf/20140904/Memo-Quesnel-Lk-Water-Quality-Aug20-AL.pdf

I am not sure if you are attempting to make a connection between the sheen and the spill in this instance, but if you are you have not provided any evidence that says that the two are related.  The confusing thing is that in one sentence you say that this is in line with what would happen if it's suspended in water, but then in the next sentence you say that "of course none of it will float".  The other thing you need to keep in mind is that copper is an element - not a compound.....as any 1st year science student would know. 

[salmonrook]

I am not questioning the integrity of the people taking the samples and doing the testing, I just think that we arent getting all the info from this test.That has more to do with politics than science and competence .
 Why are they not confirming the identity of this sheen rather than just saying thats it is probably plant based material, still  believe they could test to identify.When is a comprehensive test not warranted ,this is the most serious case where one should be done.
  Not a fan of the aforementioned crusader, I am not the one who keeps bringing up her name and have never read her material,I will make my own conclusions.
   Not trying to connect the copper concentrations and the sheen, as we dont know what the sheen is still, its only been said that it could be organic material.
 Of course its mentioned by  Moe and as they have said and I have said too, we wont know the effects of this copper and chemical cocktail for a while dependant on exposure, the heavy metals being  most harmful to fish.
 Hope this never happens or the risk will be minimal .
 
 The copper tailings that have been deposited on the bottom of the lake are mixed with other elements and chemicals making them compounds ,copper in its pure form is an element.

[shuswapsteve]

I am not questioning the integrity of the people taking the samples and doing the testing, I just think that we arent getting all the info from this test.That has more to do with politics than science and competence .

Well the beauty of this is that politics shouldn't get in the way of these results because anyone can go take samples from the lake themselves or hire a consultant to do it and have them sampled at the lab of their choice. They can then post them on their blog or take them to the media.

Not a fan of the aforementioned crusader, I am not the one who keeps bringing up her name and have never read her material,I will make my own conclusions.

I only mention Morton as an example of someone who has been critical of the sampling of this sheen (and pretty much second guessing people qualified to do this work) yet has provided no results to back up her speculation after taking sample already. It wasn't meant to call you a Morton fanatic. 

[shuswapsteve]

Preliminary results of fish samples analyzed:

http://www.fnha.ca/about/news-and-events/news/mount-polley-mine-communique-7

[Novabonker]

And they're STILL pumping crap.....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mount-polley-b-c-orders-mine-to-stop-discharging-effluent-1.2761188