Scientists Find 7,300-Mile Mercury Contamination ‘Bullseye’ Around Canadian Tar Sands

[White Eagle]

Let's discuss Canadian Tar Sands, again. It looks like we are going to be talking about this for the rest of our short lives. It looks like the mercury causes birth defects and brain damage. Can anyone say Zombie apocalypse?
Every new story that comes out about Tar Sands has a new disaster pending for it to continue.
Pray for us!

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/30/3107761/tar-sands-mercury/

Scientists Find 7,300-Mile Mercury Contamination ‘Bullseye’ Around Canadian Tar Sands

By Emily Atkin on December 30, 2013 at 1:45 pm

Just one week after Al Jazeera discovered that regulatory responsibility for Alberta, Canada’s controversial tar sands would be handed over to a fossil-fuel funded corporation, federal scientists have found that the area’s viscous petroleum deposits are surrounded by a nearly 7,500-square-mile ring of mercury.

Canadian government scientists have found that levels of mercury — a potent neurotoxin which has been found to cause severe birth defects and brain damage — around the region’s vast tar sand operations are up to 16 times higher than regular levels for the region. The findings, presented by Environment Canada researcher Jane Kirk at an international toxicology conference, showed that the 7,500 miles contaminated are “currently impacted by airborne Hg (mercury) emissions originating from oilsands developments.”

 

[Alnitak]

Mercury corrupts certain enzymes that protect the brain, such that when mercury crosses the blood brain barrier oxygen goes haywire and starts wrecking the place.

Enjoy.

 

[bankside]

Mercury is common in Alberta.

I live hundreds of kilometres away from the oilsands, the river running through our city passes no where near the oilsands, and yet we are advised to limit any fishing out of that river due to natural mercury in the water:

http://www.edmonton.ca/attractions_recreation/parks_rivervalley/fishing.aspx

The point is, if mercury gets stirred up a bit, it was always there in the environment, and it goes directly back to the local environment it comes from. In 10 years it will seep back down to the depths out of harm's way.

 

[Alnitak]

Mercury is common in Alberta.

I live hundreds of kilometres away from the oilsands, the river running through our city passes no where near the oilsands, and yet we are advised to limit any fishing out of that river due to natural mercury in the water:

http://www.edmonton.ca/attractions_recreation/parks_rivervalley/fishing.aspx

The point is, if mercury gets stirred up a bit, it was always there in the environment, and it goes directly back to the local environment it comes from. In 10 years it will seep back down to the depths out of harm's way.

There doesn't have to be much mercury in the environment. Because the element and its compounds are bioaccumulative, every step of the food chain magnifies it. As do heavy radionuclides. For those reasons I would not buy fish from Japan, or any food from the Ukraine or Russia.

 

[bankside]

True. Fortunately we don't generally harvest foodstuffs from the area around the oilsands.

My biggest concerns about the oil industry in Alberta are the use of freshwater to force oil to the surface, thus destroying and "fossilising" the freshwater forever, withdrawn from the hydrological cycle, and CO2 capture that isn't happening yet.

Did you know that Bakken oil from North Dakota is explosive? Killed 40 people in Lac Mégantic.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ory-behind-a-troubling-crude/article16157981/

 

[xbuzzerx]

There doesn't have to be much mercury in the environment. Because the element and its compounds are bioaccumulative, every step of the food chain magnifies it. As do heavy radionuclides. For those reasons I would not buy fish from Japan, or any food from the Ukraine or Russia.

A friend of mine from college runs a non-profit she started after undergrad which focuses on educating Native women in Pacific Northwestern tribes about the mercury contamination and how to safely eat locally particularly when pregnant, due to the risk of pregnancy issues and birth defects. That mercury is primarily from the Gold Rush, 150 years ago, and is still all over northern California and the northwest, including in the salmon and sturgeon, particularly in inland waterways where it has accumulated.

 

[Alnitak]

Did you know that Bakken oil from North Dakota is explosive? Killed 40 people in Lac Mégantic.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ory-behind-a-troubling-crude/article16157981/

It's volatile, and North Dakota doesn't have the proper infrastructure or rail cars for rapid oil development, not to mention it is landlocked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Dakota_oil_boom#Social_and_infrastructure_effects

 

[CowboyBob]

The North Dakota oil trains are explosive. Another one exploded yesterday in Cassleton, ND.

http://www.startribune.com/local/238207831.html

They're checking to see if lack of oil regulation is the cause for these trains exploding. The oil companies in ND have the republican Governor under their thumb.

 

[White Eagle]

Mercury is common in Alberta.

I live hundreds of kilometres away from the oilsands, the river running through our city passes no where near the oilsands, and yet we are advised to limit any fishing out of that river due to natural mercury in the water:

http://www.edmonton.ca/attractions_recreation/parks_rivervalley/fishing.aspx

The point is, if mercury gets stirred up a bit, it was always there in the environment, and it goes directly back to the local environment it comes from. In 10 years it will seep back down to the depths out of harm's way.

Glad you are more knowledgeable about it. But being from up there you would know. I thought of making the thread to your attention first then changed my mind.

 

[rareboy]

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

 

[Alnitak]

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

You first

 

[Kulindahr]

True. Fortunately we don't generally harvest foodstuffs from the area around the oilsands.

My biggest concerns about the oil industry in Alberta are the use of freshwater to force oil to the surface, thus destroying and "fossilising" the freshwater forever, withdrawn from the hydrological cycle, and CO2 capture that isn't happening yet.

Did you know that Bakken oil from North Dakota is explosive? Killed 40 people in Lac Mégantic.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ory-behind-a-troubling-crude/article16157981/

With the sea level rising, maybe sticking some water out of the cycle is a good thing.

Oh -- and explosive oil is a good argument for building a pipeline... trucking all that just means we will have an ongoing stream of such accidents, with a high likelihood that one will count as a real disaster.

 

[Kulindahr]

What doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

Oh, if only!

Mercury from old fillings has been pointed to by doctors to explain my bipolar and anxiety disorders.

 

[Alnitak]

Oh, if only!

Mercury from old fillings has been pointed to by doctors to explain my bipolar and anxiety disorders.

It should be detectable in your blood and hair I would think.

 

[Alnitak]

With the sea level rising, maybe sticking some water out of the cycle is a good thing.

Drawing water lowers elevation of the ground above. This is especially a problem in Mexico City, which has sunk several feet over the centuries.

 

[Kulindahr]

It should be detectable in your blood and hair I would think.

Not any longer -- my dentist cleaned out the old crap and replaced it like eight years ago.

 

[Kulindahr]

Drawing water lowers elevation of the ground above. This is especially a problem in Mexico City, which has sunk several feet over the centuries.

So we need a system to put it back.

A relative in Nebraska told us the Department of Agriculture is contemplating putting in a huge lake in the sand hills; the geology there is such that it would take years just to see any results of putting water behind a dam because it would keep soaking into the ground. Once the lake got filled, it would effectively pump water back into the aquifer. The problem is that they'd be sending down all the chemicals that get into our rivers now, as well as those blown by the wind. Presumably it could be filtered first, but the cost would be prohibitive (OTOH, there's been progress toward membranes that would only allow H2O molecules through, in which case they could just line the lake with it).

 

[Alnitak]

So we need a system to put it back.

A relative in Nebraska told us the Department of Agriculture is contemplating putting in a huge lake in the sand hills; the geology there is such that it would take years just to see any results of putting water behind a dam because it would keep soaking into the ground. Once the lake got filled, it would effectively pump water back into the aquifer. The problem is that they'd be sending down all the chemicals that get into our rivers now, as well as those blown by the wind. Presumably it could be filtered first, but the cost would be prohibitive (OTOH, there's been progress toward membranes that would only allow H2O molecules through, in which case they could just line the lake with it).

Not 27 feet of it as Mexico City has.

 

[bankside]

Drawing water lowers elevation of the ground above. This is especially a problem in Mexico City, which has sunk several feet over the centuries.

Well the opposite isn't brilliant environmentalism either. Injecting water - especially freshwater - seems like a squandered resource.

The nice solution to both problems would be the commercialization of existing / developing technology to inject CO2 (problematic in itself) into the wells to force oil to the surface (thus leaving the freshwater where it belongs in the river bed, and the downstream riparian ecology in tact).

 

[Alnitak]

Well the opposite isn't brilliant environmentalism either. Injecting water - especially freshwater - seems like a squandered resource.

The nice solution to both problems would be the commercialization of existing / developing technology to inject CO2 (problematic in itself) into the wells to force oil to the surface (thus leaving the freshwater where it belongs in the river bed, and the downstream riparian ecology in tact).

Human development is impossible without impacting the environment in some way.