Johannesburg Facing Pollution Nightmare

[dlk001]

Does anyone have a reference to the number and location of mine tunnels running below Johannesburg ?

In particular I'm looking for details on the longest tunnel running off a working or retired mine shaft.

Previous underground mine plans are kept at the department of minerals. These plans are very old and not in digital format that you can google or download. Another source of this information would be a mining company called Central Rand Gold who have been prospecting the Witwatersrand basin from south of Joburg.

 

[Ancalagon]

Thanks. I know where Plimer's critics are coming from. At no point does he deny global warming, or variations in sea levels. What he is saying is that the predictive models are badly flawed because the data sets are incomplete relying on samples taken over a fraction of the Earth's surface during a relatively short period of the Earth's history. He says that so-called climate scientists are ignoring millions of years of historical, meteorological and geological evidence showing that the Earth has survived more extreme changes in the past.

Plimer's book does not address industrial pollution which continues to be a problem regardless of whether or not it contributes to climate change. He is not arguing against the need the protect and preserve the environment or to reduce industrial pollution - such as the threat facing South Africa's fresh water resources - and our reliance on fossil fuels. He does not say that we should not be ready for climate change so as to be able to adapt in the best way we can.

Plimer believes wholeheartedly in climate change. He simply does not believe that human beings can influence or control it because its about much, much more than the relatively small amounts of greenhouse gases produced by human activity. He does not deny that our emissions damage the environment in other ways.

The response to him has been predictably hysterical because of the risk that his work will be used in support of the arguments of the real denialists, know-nothings and flat-earthers.

I accept his argument that predictions based on computer models - at this time - are next to worthless. Since 1998 most of the predictions made a decade ago have been invalidated. Climate is just too complex, and this is what Plimer is saying. He knows all about change, and its not just the weather: its seismic, its cosmic! Read Plimer and you will see that there is nothing on this planet which is not changing. Even the Earth beneath our feet is rising and fallling, however imperceptibly, in line with natural processes that have nothing to do with human produced CO2, one compound out of many that affect life on Earth.

See, this is a viewpoint I can agree with. Its not that climate change doesnt occur, or that pollution isnt a problem, or that there isnt a relationship between them, its the jumping to conclusions that I dont like. All of Durban will be underwater by 2012, that kind of thing. Icecaps to shrink by 50% over the next 20 years, kinda thing.

And its interesting to see the reaction that such viewpoints get - we get called industrialists, deniers and skeptics. Whatever happened to healthy skepticism? It seems the only viewpoints you are allowed to hold wrt to climate change are at the extreme ends of the scale, ie we're all doomed we need to build a spacecraft and leave earth right now, or its all a hoax and a lie to get us to pay more taxes. Why does no one respect the middle ground?

 

[Wikkelspies]

Why does no one respect the middle ground?

Probably because to do the reading necessary to gain a full understanding of the issue is too much like hard work. The so-called 'deep ecologists' have long argued that we will continue to face a whole raft of problems as long as population continues to grow exponentially and we mercilessly strip the Earth of its resources. Fossil fuels and the pollution caused by burning them are only a small part of this.

I'll all for conserving energy, limiting the unnecessary use of motor vehicles, reducing wasteful consumption (Just look at the epidemic of obesity, heart disease and diabetes in developed nations), and finding alternatives to fossil fuels, if only because most of the oil, for example, is under the soil of unstable nations controlled by raving ratbags.

There are numerous natural events that could cause disaster on a regional, continental, hemispherical or even global scale. None of these are predictable given the current state of our knowledge.

If the climate scientists, whether or not their predictions turn out to be correct, succeed in focusing attention on the environment and bringing about some positive changes in the way we live on this planet, they will have achieved something. Perhaps they won't come out and say so for fear of being linked to the 'Greenies' and the political left.

As for rising sea levels, building too close to the shores of any major river, lake or large body of water has always been a mug's game; tempting fate. Any section of the coastline of almost any continent could experience a super storm or even a tsunami at any time. Geologists have identified numerous points where tsunami waves generated by seismic activity have impacted the coastline in prehistoric times. It is not for nothing that, until comparatively recently, most coastal towns and villages developed on the slopes of hills and on ridges overlooking the sea. Only as land became scarce did people begin to move onto floodplains and to reclaim marshland and even intertidal zones. New Orleans is a case in point, although it has been pointed out that - had the naturally occurring mangroves, coastal scrub and sand dunes not been cleared over the years - the city might have escaped the worst that Katrina dealt out.

When we interfere with nature rather than adapting to it we invariably lose.

 

[Wikkelspies]

Toxic Waste Engulfs Part Of Hungary

BUDAPEST (AFP) - A damburst of toxic sludge that killed at least four people and left scores needing treatment for chemical burns and other injuries could take up to a year to clean up, officials said.

"The clean-up and reconstruction could take months, even a year," Environment Secretary Zoltan Illes said.

On Monday, the retaining walls of a reservoir at an aluminium plant in Ajka in western Hungary collapsed, sending a toxic soup of industrial waste cascading through seven villages.

The devastation spread across an area of 40 square kilometers (15.4 square miles) in what officials say is Hungary's worst-ever chemical accident.

Three adults and one child were killed and 123 people were injured, while three people are still missing.

Karoly Tily, the mayor of Kolontar, the village where all four victims died, declared Wednesday a day of mourning, and the company which owned the reservoir, the Hungarian Aluminium Production and Trade Company (MAL), said it would foot the costs of the funerals.

Illes told online publication Langlovak in an interview that the overall costs of the clean-up and reconstruction "could reach tens of millions of euros (dollars)."

If MAL was unable to drum up the funds, "the sum will be borne by the Hungarian government, or it might be necessary to ask the European Union for aid," he said.

The tidal wave of sludge overturned cars, swept away possessions and raised fears that pollution leeching from it could reach the Danube River, which courses through Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania and Ukraine before flowing into the Black Sea. Related article: Pensioner recalls toxic mud wave

Late Wednesday officials said they were confident the contamination would not reach Europe's second longest river

"If our calculations are right then by the time the sludge reaches the Danube contamination will be under the acceptable levels," Emil Jenak, president of Northern Transdanubian Water Management, told AFP.

A pollution expert, quoted by the Hungarian news agency MTI, said rain and neutralising agents used so far had already led to a drop in alkaline levels in the Marcal river "and the connecting Raba will suffer much less damage" than feared.

But environmental organisation Greenpeace detected lead, chrome and arsenic in samples taken from a tributary of the Marcal, the river Torma.

The mud -- a residue from aluminium production which is highly corrosive and contains toxic heavy metals such as lead, cadmium, arsenic and chromium -- destroyed all vegetation other than trees and seeped into hundreds of houses in villages and contaminated waterways.

A spokeswoman for the disaster relief services, Timea Petroczi, insisted that the drinking water system had not been affected, but "as a precautionary measure, people are not allowed to use the water wells".

Residents were also banned from eating any home-grown produce or from hunting or fishing in the region, she said.

Eyewitnesses say the force of the wave was so strong that cars were sucked out from their garages and it tore out windows and doors, covering everything.

"I've lost everything. We've lost everything," said one man standing in front of the remains of his house, which he said he had just spent 5,000 euros (6,900 dollars) in renovating.

Two days after the disaster, cars, debris and dead animals still littered streets and fields.

"It is still chaos here, nobody knows what to do or where to start," said one volunteer worker.

"I think it's a disgrace. Things are going so slowly. The flood was on Monday and now on Wednesday we're still waiting for orders," he said.

National police chief Jozsef Hatala said the national bureau of investigation MNY would take over the probe into the accident "given the complexity and importance of the matter".

MAL has suspended all operations at the plant amid suggestions that the spill was caused by too much sludge in the tanks.

Company chief Zoltan Bakonyi warned that if production were not resumed soon, MAL could go bankrupt.
The company is the sole large employer in the impoverished region and has a workforce of 1,100.

Follow Yahoo!7 on Twitter

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/8084966/hungary-says-clean-up-of-toxic-spill-could-take-a-year/

 

[Wikkelspies]

Food for thought?

Global Warming Mass Mania
12/08/09 04:38 AM

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...mments/why_killing_jobs_wont_save_the_planet/

Quote:
Aussie Scientist: 'Global Warming is Mass Mania of Our Times' -- 'Doubt seen as conscious deliberate evil deserving expulsion or extermination'

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2009/08/walter-starck

http://www.climatedepot.com/

Quote:
As Mark Twain wrote over a century ago: “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.”

In the current instance there is also abundant scientific evidence to indicate that:

* The amount of warming from increased carbon dioxide emissions has been greatly overestimated.

* Most of the uncertain fraction of a degree of warming that has occurred over the past century is attributable to measurement bias and natural variability.

* Predictions of catastrophic consequences are entirely speculative and unlikely.

* The net result of a projected doubling of atmospheric CO2 is most likely to be positive.

* Fossil fuels will run out well before any drastic effects on climate are possible.

* If man made global warming is indeed real, and it helps to prevent another ice age, this would be the most fortunate thing that has happened to our species since we barely escaped extinction from an especially cold period during the last ice age some 75,000 years ago.

Quote:
The entire Global Warming scenario is predicated on continued undiminished consumption of fossil fuel. However, the inability of conventional energy supplies to meet increasing global demand is already confronting us. No matter how much oil may still exist somewhere underground, new discoveries are not keeping pace with depletion of known reserves and current demand is pushing the limits of production capacity. New discoveries are also increasingly found in deep water or remote locations where costs are high.

With or without GW, alternative sources of energy must ultimately be developed. How successful this will be is far from certain. Renewable energy is diffuse. The notion of a future economy powered by sunbeams and summer breezes is a happy fantasy. The future offered by renewable energy alone is one of considerable energy constraint and decreased affluence.

Cheap abundant energy from fossil fuels is a vital element in virtually every product and service in our current economy. Without adequate supplies of affordable liquid hydrocarbon fuels for transportation and mobile machinery our existing economy cannot continue to function, nor will be able to even feed the population.

Our society doesn't run on hypotheticals. Aircraft, ships, trucks and heavy machinery are not going to be powered by batteries. Premature attempts to adopt immature, unproven technology fostered by ill-conceived subsidies and regulations entails a high risk of shortages and costly mistakes. The emerging bio-fuels and wind energy fiascos are already an example.

Quote:
Over the next few years economic recession will result in a much greater reduction in emissions than anything achievable from regulatory measures over the same period. Meanwhile, evidence is steadily accumulating that the amount and impacts of greenhouse warming have been greatly overestimated, and that a natural cooling cycle is now overriding any small increase in GH effect attributable to human emissions.

http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2009/08/walter-starck