Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
First, this came from one researcher and hasn't been corroborated by other sources. I'm not trying to discount his work, but his testimony wasn't all that quantitative and we've yet to see further evidence (quote - "...too little to draw any conclusions" when referring to the concentrations). Also, the alleged formaldehyde wasn't in the tank. Formaldehyde is an oxidized form of methanol, which is a degradation product of MCHM. However, this is through a catalytic oxidation and would require temperatures in excess of 250 C, obviously not experienced in the Elk or the WVAW treatment plant. I'm not saying that formaldehyde was not in the water, but it isn't likely it came from the spill. That is, unless there was more in the tank that wasn't divulged, but I think that's unlikely as they released all of that information to the DEP. Then again, Freedom officials are lying cheats.
I would like to see more information on his sample gathering and analysis techniques (i.e. how the samples were obtained, stored, transferred, and what parameters he measured and what he used to measure chemical constituency). This was apparently one restaurant at one sample time. I'd like to know if this is a system-wide occurrence or just an isolated incident. Further testing is certainly needed if even trace amounts of formaldehyde were found, IMO.
First, this came from one researcher and hasn't been corroborated by other sources. I'm not trying to discount his work, but his testimony wasn't all that quantitative and we've yet to see further evidence (quote - "...too little to draw any conclusions" when referring to the concentrations). Also, the alleged formaldehyde wasn't in the tank. Formaldehyde is an oxidized form of methanol, which is a degradation product of MCHM. However, this is through a catalytic oxidation and would require temperatures in excess of 250 C, obviously not experienced in the Elk or the WVAW treatment plant. I'm not saying that formaldehyde was not in the water, but it isn't likely it came from the spill. That is, unless there was more in the tank that wasn't divulged, but I think that's unlikely as they released all of that information to the DEP. Then again, Freedom officials are lying cheats.
I would like to see more information on his sample gathering and analysis techniques (i.e. how the samples were obtained, stored, transferred, and what parameters he measured and what he used to measure chemical constituency). This was apparently one restaurant at one sample time. I'd like to know if this is a system-wide occurrence or just an isolated incident. Further testing is certainly needed if even trace amounts of formaldehyde were found, IMO.
Well said, and you obviously know a whole lot more about these processes than me.
So, you believe there might not be the substance in the water, or that if there is, it is as a result of other substances degrading? Interesting. Is it also possible that an undertaker (for example) in the area could have discharged something that ended up in the water supply, unrelated to the spill?
I honestly don't know how it got there. I'll say there might be a chance it is from the spill as we're just not totally sure how MCHM behaves in natural and biological systems. I don't think (but I don't know) that it was from another source upstream in the Elk. Honestly, one can't speculate without knowing if it was an isolated incident or not. If it is isolated, then there is something wrong in that building or he screwed up during his testing (don't think that's an issue but one can never rule out human error). If formaldehyde is present in samples from across the system, then I would bet it was due to the degradation of MCHM and the formaldehyde is the result of some catalytic or enzymatic reaction that we don't know too much about or hadn't anticipated being a problem.
And I will admit that I probably know better about this stuff than most on the board, but I wouldn't categorize myself as an expert by any means. All I know is that formaldehyde shouldn't be in the water if what the researcher says is true.
That is a very good article, thanks for sharing. That goes into some of my concerns with his methodology and results reporting. I think a crucial thing to realize is that he consults for a law firm that has already filed suit against Freedom. We must always look out for biases when people of influence are throwing out quotes, possibly making opinion seem like fact due to their position. This goes for both sides of the argument.
That is a very good article, thanks for sharing. That goes into some of my concerns with his methodology and results reporting. I think a crucial thing to realize is that he consults for a law firm that has already filed suit against Freedom. We must always look out for biases when people of influence are throwing out quotes, possibly making opinion seem like fact due to their position. This goes for both sides of the argument.
No one knows the effects. That's why money has been given to the three universities to study this. As for lawsuits against Freedom they have filed for bankruptcy.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 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 2 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.
