Comments on: The Pit of Life and Death http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death A collection of Damn Interesting things Mon, 15 Mar 2010 04:21:03 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Richard Solensky http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-25625 Richard Solensky Thu, 07 Jan 2010 02:02:04 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-25625 Thanks for the article, Fuckette. It's amazing - and interesting - to see just how nice industries behave when there's no government looking over their shoulder, enforcing regulations on behalf of the citizenry. And speaking of polluted places, you might want to look into the North Pacific Gyre. Also known as the World's Largest Accidental Garbage Dump. That one's going to be a real pain to clean up! Thanks for the article, Fuckette. It’s amazing – and interesting – to see just how nice industries behave when there’s no government looking over their shoulder, enforcing regulations on behalf of the citizenry.

And speaking of polluted places, you might want to look into the North Pacific Gyre. Also known as the World’s Largest Accidental Garbage Dump. That one’s going to be a real pain to clean up!

]]> By: Fuckette http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-25618 Fuckette Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:43:51 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-25618 PS. Radiatidon, you are my idol! We've had a slow day at work today so I've been catching up on my DI articles and their corresponding comments, and you are just wonderful. I just had to share. :) PS. Radiatidon, you are my idol! We’ve had a slow day at work today so I’ve been catching up on my DI articles and their corresponding comments, and you are just wonderful. I just had to share. :)

]]> By: Fuckette http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-25617 Fuckette Mon, 04 Jan 2010 21:41:31 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-25617 It looks like no one has been on this article commenting in a while, but for those who may still be reading, you may be interested to read about some other super-polluted sites around the world. http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/wwpp2007/finalReport2007.pdf Page 6 is where you'll find the summary, page 11 is where the detailed explainations start. Simply fascinating! Well, not just "simply" fascinating, I suppose - also horrifying. The kind of man-made messes described there make the Berkeley Pit look like kids' play. (Not that it lessens the danger for the fine folks of Montana.) Notably absent from the Top Ten of the Dirty Thirty linked above is a site I first learned of in depth right here on DI: Chelyabinsk, as linked below: http://www.damninteresting.com/in-soviet-russia-lake-contaminates-you If something that appallingly contaminated didn't make it on this list, just imagine how bad the pollution is at the sites that ARE included! Sorry to get all Kanye West there for a moment with my CAPS LOCK KEY!, but I just can't help myself sometimes... It looks like no one has been on this article commenting in a while, but for those who may still be reading, you may be interested to read about some other super-polluted sites around the world.

http://www.blacksmithinstitute.org/wwpp2007/finalReport2007.pdf

Page 6 is where you’ll find the summary, page 11 is where the detailed explainations start. Simply fascinating! Well, not just “simply” fascinating, I suppose – also horrifying. The kind of man-made messes described there make the Berkeley Pit look like kids’ play. (Not that it lessens the danger for the fine folks of Montana.) Notably absent from the Top Ten of the Dirty Thirty linked above is a site I first learned of in depth right here on DI: Chelyabinsk, as linked below:

http://www.damninteresting.com/in-soviet-russia-lake-contaminates-you

If something that appallingly contaminated didn’t make it on this list, just imagine how bad the pollution is at the sites that ARE included! Sorry to get all Kanye West there for a moment with my CAPS LOCK KEY!, but I just can’t help myself sometimes…

]]> By: Mirage_GSM http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-24550 Mirage_GSM Thu, 28 May 2009 10:04:44 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-24550 [quote]Radiatidon said: "... Depending how one reads the list, various countries can be pushed to the top depending on type of pollutant based on population. For instance Australia is the world’s worst polluter per capita producing five times more carbon due to power generating than China, which holds the second spot according to CARMA. CARMA is a database that monitors carbon emissions of over 4,000 power companies and over 50,000 power plants worldwide. Working off this same list, the worst polluting power plants are: 1 – Janschwalde in Germany with 27.4 million tons. 2 – Belhatov in Poland with 25.5 million tons. 3 – Drax in the UK with 23.7 million tons. ..."[/quote] [quote]Clondyke said: "Mmmhh…reading this source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk_J%C3%A4nschwalde it is on #7 on the worldwide list and #3 in the European Union. However, interesting article - and one more place on the map to leave out. ;-) ..."[/quote] I've visited the CARMA homepage and what they report are not pollution levels but Carbondioxide emissions. While CO2 is responsible for a good share of global warming, it is not a pollutant. So just because this plant emits large amounts of CO2 is no reason to avoid it. (I don't know what other stuff the plant emits, but we have quite strict emission caps for pollutants here in Germany, so I wouldn't be too worried. Also, CARMA reports the absolute emissions not the efficiency. Apparently that particular plant has an efficiency level of 35,5% which seems to be a bit on the low side for coal power plants but it was built in the 60s, so that is to be expected. [quote]Radiatidon said: “…
Depending how one reads the list, various countries can be pushed to the top depending on type of pollutant based on population. For instance Australia is the world’s worst polluter per capita producing five times more carbon due to power generating than China, which holds the second spot according to CARMA. CARMA is a database that monitors carbon emissions of over 4,000 power companies and over 50,000 power plants worldwide.
Working off this same list, the worst polluting power plants are:
1 – Janschwalde in Germany with 27.4 million tons.
2 – Belhatov in Poland with 25.5 million tons.
3 – Drax in the UK with 23.7 million tons. …”[/quote]
[quote]Clondyke said: “Mmmhh…reading this source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk_J%C3%A4nschwalde
it is on #7 on the worldwide list and #3 in the European Union.
However, interesting article – and one more place on the map to leave out. ;-) …”[/quote]
I’ve visited the CARMA homepage and what they report are not pollution levels but Carbondioxide emissions. While CO2 is responsible for a good share of global warming, it is not a pollutant. So just because this plant emits large amounts of CO2 is no reason to avoid it. (I don’t know what other stuff the plant emits, but we have quite strict emission caps for pollutants here in Germany, so I wouldn’t be too worried.
Also, CARMA reports the absolute emissions not the efficiency. Apparently that particular plant has an efficiency level of 35,5% which seems to be a bit on the low side for coal power plants but it was built in the 60s, so that is to be expected.

]]> By: bloop1 http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-23859 bloop1 Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:28:51 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-23859 My mum made this pit, pure love juice My mum made this pit, pure love juice

]]> By: MortallyWounded http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-23278 MortallyWounded Sat, 08 Nov 2008 14:22:52 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-23278 [quote]BenKinsey said: "Buttehole??? Am I the first to think of this immediately??"[/quote] I wonder if the wind picks up enough to go windsurfing. <i>Cue "Buttehole Surfers"</i> music. Another clear cut case of how even though humans can do a lot of damage to the earth, the earth has a way of fixing itself many times. [quote]BenKinsey said: “Buttehole??? Am I the first to think of this immediately??”[/quote]

I wonder if the wind picks up enough to go windsurfing. Cue “Buttehole Surfers” music.

Another clear cut case of how even though humans can do a lot of damage to the earth, the earth has a way of fixing itself many times.

]]> By: BenKinsey http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-22952 BenKinsey Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:47:19 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-22952 Buttehole??? Am I the first to think of this immediately?? Buttehole??? Am I the first to think of this immediately??

]]> By: Anthropositor http://www.damninteresting.com/the-pit-of-life-and-death#comment-22536 Anthropositor Sat, 16 Aug 2008 04:39:52 +0000 http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=961#comment-22536 Not being argumentative here, but certainly a high speed centrifuge should be a part of the equation. I did not bring up the turbidity earlier, but certainly it is a part of the situation here. There is not the slightest question that centrifuging will reduce even ultra fine particulates, simplifying the remainder of the task. I'd say more, but I have a lot on my plate which I must address, and I really do not want to be percieved as starting a debate, particularly with two people who seem to be able to connect coherent thoughts together without the aid of scotch tape. If I may though, Photo, I would suggest something far larger than what you have in mind. It is already state-of=the-art. The centrifuge currently in use at Hyperian Waste Treatment Plant adjacent to El Segundo in the Los Angeles Basin, which recieves most of the sewage wastewater from the extended county area. But for that centrifuge we are talking major bucks. For the volume here, I would be thinking maybe 1/10 scale. Then it would be easier to go after the ions. Not being argumentative here, but certainly a high speed centrifuge should be a part of the equation. I did not bring up the turbidity earlier, but certainly it is a part of the situation here. There is not the slightest question that centrifuging will reduce even ultra fine particulates, simplifying the remainder of the task. I’d say more, but I have a lot on my plate which I must address, and I really do not want to be percieved as starting a debate, particularly with two people who seem to be able to connect coherent thoughts together without the aid of scotch tape.

If I may though, Photo, I would suggest something far larger than what you have in mind. It is already state-of=the-art.
The centrifuge currently in use at Hyperian Waste Treatment Plant adjacent to El Segundo in the Los Angeles Basin, which recieves most of the sewage wastewater from the extended county area.

But for that centrifuge we are talking major bucks. For the volume here, I would be thinking maybe 1/10 scale. Then it would be easier to go after the ions.

]]>