of only about 5% of the tank's volume (Muskal). Information suggests PPH is similar in water solubility as MCHM, which means any amount of PPH currently in the water system is likely to be extremely low (Muskal). Finally, the CDC has also released that based on the “initial review of currently available toxicologic information, the information does not suggest any new health concerns associated with the release of PPH.” (Jordan). Although this may not be too frightening to the citizens affected by the spill, it does not provide relief for them either because it means PPH can carry all the other symptoms associated with MCHM.
How did this spill affect the potable water?
Because of the spill’s proximity to the largest
water treatment plant in Charleston, Kanawha Valley, the 100,000 homes and businesses, or 250,000 to 300,000 people have been affected
(Bratu). Residents have been instructed not to drink tap water, bathe or use the water for anything other than flushing the toilet because
little is known on the toxicity of any of the chemicals (Fitzsimmons). West Virginians were also warned that drinking from the contaminated water had the probability of causing symptoms like severe burning in throat, skin, and eye irritation, non-stop vomiting, and trouble breathing (Bratu). According to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration Methylcyclohexane can be dangerous in high concentrations, but generally only causes eye, skin and throat irritation, trouble breathing and dizziness or drowsiness if people are exposed. It can also cause pneumonia if it’s breathed deep into the lungs and nausea if it’s swallowed, but the effects of prolonged exposure aren’t clear (Bratu). There have not been any report of injuries directly related to the spill, but after the ban on water was lifted chemical-related hospital emissions doubled in Charleston (Valentine). The spill was much larger than the initial reports. Freedom Industries said about 10,000 gallons of a blend of crude MCHM and PPH leaked from its chemical plant into the Elk River (Valentine), a 25 percent increase from a previous estimate of 7,500 gallons (initial government estimates of no more than 5,000 gallons), but the ban had been lifted because
small concentrations were detected.
According to the EPA, 399 drinking water sources have abased due to power plants all over the country (Cappiello). Some may propose taking down the power plant, but the contamination does not end there. For example, there is an abandoned coal mine in southeastern Ohio that was shut down over a century ago that still pollutes portions of the Raccoon Creek. Parts of the creek are orange with iron and the rocks along its path are coated with white with aluminum. This means that even if all these power plants were shut down, there is still possibility that excess contaminants around the area would continue polluting the environment for years to come.
Could it have been prevented?
In August of 2008, Freedom Industries, the same company that caused this spill to happen, experienced a chemical explosion where two workers were killed. The US Chemical Safety Board stepped in to investigate what went wrong, identifying equipment failures, management lapses, poor procedures, as the the cause of the explosion, but the most shocking revelation was that these problems had been documented before. With Freedom Industries poor track, the CSB strongly urged the state and Kanawha County to implement a new safety program that would include regular government audits and new accident-prevention procedures, but this was ignored by state officials (Cantú). So, in theory, this spill could have been prevented, had that state taken the suggestions into action Also, according to Plumer, little testing is required for new chemicals and no testing is required for the 62,000 chemicals that were grandfathered in back in 1976, so if laws were passed requiring all chemicals to be tested, the chance of this leak happening would be nearing zero (Plumer). And, if a chemical did happen to leak all safety information would`1 be readily available. There are also new analytical technologies, such as gas chromatography, a type of chromatography that can be used for separating and analyzing compounds that can be vaporized without decomposition, and mass spectrometry, used to determine the elemental structure of compounds by creating single spectrum. That can be used to test a longer list of unknown chemicals, but “to expect a water company to monitor for thousands of chemicals, it just is not practical and it would be cost-prohibitive," (Shrogen) Brent Fewell, senior vice president of environment, health and safety of a different water company, United Waters, told the National Public Radio.
How is this problem being resolved?
On January 12th, three days after the spill, officials tested the amount of chemical in the water, but concluded that it might take days before the water could be determined safe (Heyman). That Saturday and Sunday, officials conducted at least 100 additional tests of samples. Also, different organizations are working together to create how-to manuals for cleaning their plumbing systems when the ban was relegated. So far, as of January 28th, “the company has been able to clean up about 1,272 gallons of the chemical using absorbent booms and other control devices” (Valentine). The other 6,000 have not been mentioned.
Possible solutions to prevent future spills
Last year, the EPA proposed setting limits on some of the compounds since there are no federal limits on the majority of chemicals that power plants pipe directly into rivers, streams and reservoirs. This was the the first update proposal since 1982 (Cappiello). It is necessary that all companies should research the toxicity of the chemicals before use, in order to know how to clean chemicals up and how these chemicals can affect people. Also, there should be a creation of jobs that allow all sites to be inspected more frequently since the water plant in Charleston has not been inspected in thirteen years. The inspection regarded MCHM as safe enough that additional regulations were not required — “so, given limited manpower, the site was deemed a lower priority and the problems with the containment dike were never discovered,” (Plumer). The fact that the last inspection was in 2001,may have been a huge factor in why the spill happened. Finally, the government could go as far as passing legislation that prevents these types of spill from happening, since it is clear that these types of bills have not been passed. These bills could require state inspections of aboveground chemical storage facilities and the industry's development of state-approved emergency response plans. It would allow states to recoup emergency response costs and to ensure drinking water systems have the tools and information to respond to spills and other emergencies.
Once again, think about just how much water you use on a regular basis. It is so precious that come think of it, almost all your everyday activities require some water. Now, put yourself in the shoes of the 300,000 West Virginia citizens who were stripped of this privilege. What would you do? Who is there to blame? Could more have been done?
Emergency crew vehiciles work to clean up the spill.
34