Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks everyone. As always it takes time to research this online, and some sources are specious. I am trying to be objective. I remember the Bhopal protests in NYC...I was very young and its the first time I heard something negative about Union Carbide.
It's not really at all odd if you review the growth history of the Eastman plant and look at many of the old site pictures that the company has on display in locations such as the company museum in the Employee Center on South Wilcox Drive. The plant there started operation in the early 1920's and was surrounded by cornfields and woodland in all directions. Most city development was probably two miles away. Very early on Kodak bought up most of the agricultural land along the river south of Blue Ridge Glass. Much of the residential development around the plant did not occur until the post-WWII boom and by then the current plant footprint was already established. That footprint has not really expanded since then although much development and replacement has been added within that footprint. Virtually all of the residential property of the once infamous Long Island community has been bought and converted to industrial use- mostly since 1980. Eastman once has much company housing along area of Lincoln Street but that is all gone now.
So, the dense residential perimeter came long after the plant was there. Same thing seems to happen with airports for some reason. When the Bopal disaster happened in India several years ago people asked why Union Carbide would locate a dangerous process plant the middle of a densely populated "slum". The answer was that the plant was originally built in a remote, rural location and such investment in rural India attracts people like flies to roadkill (works in Tennessee too).
True. It is usually the plant/industry of this magnitude that was in the location before the residential. My grandfather worked for John Deer in Moline Illinois, pretty much the same thing. My Dad worked for Pratt and Whitney in East Hartford, pretty much the same thing. Which reminds me of both there in the Hartford area and of in West Palm Beach FL. Both places had residents that complained all the time about the noise pollution. My thought was always "umm....did you somehow not know you bought a house right under a flight path of the local international airport? Or the test facility for the jet engines "
Folks move to where the jobs are, then the housing pops up by the facility that has the jobs, then time passes and the residents complain about the major employers negative impact on the community.....vicious cycle I guess. Then again, that is where the "suburbs" came from...now folks want to move back closer.
"And while it's certainly true that Eastman's toxic release inventory is significantly higher than all of Philadelphia Co.'s, large manufacturers typically aren't located in densely populated urban centers." Quote from Kamoshika.
Obviously you have never been to Philadelphia. The one main reason I picked this county because I could not think of any more polluted area in the country. The inner city abounds with industry, i.e., Allied Chemical located near Bridge & Richmond in NE Phila. The refineries in south phila close to the Phila international emit an odor that no one would ever forget. Slaughter houses and tanneries. Paint manufactures, pharmaceuticals, so many more.
As for livestock, Philadelphia processes livestock, (slaughter houses), and I am sure they process more beef, chicken, and hogs than are in Sullivan county.
One thing Kamoshika didn't mention was that the city of Philadelphia is Philadelphia county and it's population for 2008 was 1,447,395 compared to the population of Kingsport of 44,191. As one might expect cancer rates would be higher simply due to the greater population. Comparing the two areas I would expect Sullivan county to be pristine compared to Philadelphia but in fact is more polluted. When you account for the difference in population the pollution factor of Sullivan county is downright alarming.
One thing Kamoshika didn't mention was that the city of Philadelphia is Philadelphia county and it's population for 2008 was 1,447,395 compared to the population of Kingsport of 44,191. As one might expect cancer rates would be higher simply due to the greater population. Comparing the two areas I would expect Sullivan county to be pristine compared to Philadelphia but in fact is more polluted. When you account for the difference in population the pollution factor of Sullivan county is downright alarming.
Quote:
BTW, using that same website you referenced (Scorecard.org), Philadelphia Co.'s additional cancer risk (per 1 million people) for hazardous air pollutants is 3.8 times that of Sullivan Co. and their non-cancer hazard index is 3.4 times greater.
donsabi, I'm not sure you understand how statistics work. Or at least these statistics. Just because it says "per 1 million people" doesn't mean that somehow, these factors are going to be increased every million people you throw in the pot. Even if that were the case, since Philadelphia has approximately *1mil, the rates of pollutants and indices should be 1x. Obviously not.
That having been said, someone in Sullivan County is releasing enough toxins to push the county in the top 10% of toxic-release and mostly top 10% for air pollutants.
They're doing better though, in 1988 total release pounds were nearly 50m air, 1.5 mil for water, down to 4 mil and 500k. For the county, total releases are down 45mil over roughly two decades.
jabogitlu,
I regret you did not understand what I was trying to point out. Rather that end up in a verbal ping pong match I will simplify the matter of pollution in Sullivan County for all readers.
If any one of you are concerned about the pollution in the Tri-Cities area you may go to a website know as Scorecard.com and following their very easy instructions you can compare the pollution of one area to another usually as county to county. Many of you are concerned because you are worried about the water you are drinking and the air you and your children are breathing and you have good cause to be concerned. I strongly urge you to research Scorecard.com and draw your own conclusions.
Many people in Kingsport complain, myself included, of unexplained headaches, irritated eyes and a mild cough. The usual answer for this is allergies. This area does ranks very high on the allergy list. There is another website know as Pollen.com that will show you the pollen count and other allergens in any area. It has been my experience that when I have these symptoms, headache and eye irritation, I checked Pollen.com and in many cases the pollen was very low and I believe that the cause of my symptoms were probably due to the pollution than allergies.
I am not making conclusions for anyone. I am simply stating my case as I see it. It is up to you to educate yourself through websites like Scorecard.com and Pollen.com.
jabogitlu,
I regret you did not understand what I was trying to point out. Rather that end up in a verbal ping pong match I will simplify the matter of pollution in Sullivan County for all readers.
If any one of you are concerned about the pollution in the Tri-Cities area you may go to a website know as Scorecard.com and following their very easy instructions you can compare the pollution of one area to another usually as county to county. Many of you are concerned because you are worried about the water you are drinking and the air you and your children are breathing and you have good cause to be concerned. I strongly urge you to research Scorecard.com and draw your own conclusions.
Many people in Kingsport complain, myself included, of unexplained headaches, irritated eyes and a mild cough. The usual answer for this is allergies. This area does ranks very high on the allergy list. There is another website know as Pollen.com that will show you the pollen count and other allergens in any area. It has been my experience that when I have these symptoms, headache and eye irritation, I checked Pollen.com and in many cases the pollen was very low and I believe that the cause of my symptoms were probably due to the pollution than allergies.
I am not making conclusions for anyone. I am simply stating my case as I see it. It is up to you to educate yourself through websites like Scorecard.com and Pollen.com.
Thanks so much for posting these websites! Valuable info to have access to.. As an allergy sufferer, I was really surprised to compare my zip, 37681 (on pollen.com) with places I used to live in NC & CT and find it's not really so bad here comparatively! But that was based on *today*.. (There were much higher readings in the preceding days)
As to scorecard.com - Per their statistics, this area is really bad in terms of polution.
Quote from the site: "Toxic Chemicals Released by Factories, Power Plants and Other Industrial Companies - [SIZE=2]In 2002, this county ranked among the dirtiest/worst 20% of all counties in the U.S. in terms of air releases of recognized developmental toxicants." [/SIZE]
I wonder if this figure has changed dramatically in the last few years?
Again, thank you donsabi...
It does look like the farther north you go, you diminish your health risks are!
Based on this, maybe we should all move to Maine or Montana - definitely not California, Florida, New York or Texas.. Fascinating and scary info.
Good point donsabi on the Scoredcard website. The EPA also provides useful information regarding every region of the united states if you wish to know about constituents of concern in your water, air soil. http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/state.cfm?statepostal=TN
If you use the EPA's website you can learn about issues of concern in every state in the union. It's very hard to find an area in the US that has not been adversely affected by human industry.
Interesting info Dreams of Monterey, I see that ADM is number two on the list you posted. Seems that the ethanol from corn to supplement 10% of the gasoline we burn comes at a hefty environmental price. The ADM plants they list as some of their highest polluters seem to be providing the ethanol used to thin out our gasoline to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and make our air cleaner, unless I misinterpret the available data.
Hmmm, burning coal to convert corn to ethanol, which requires petroleum to grow the corn in both fuel to run the machinery and to make the nitrogen based fertlizer, to thin out our gasoline by 10%, to reduce our importation of foreign oil...that makes sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
" 
