Greenpeace None Too Happy with Mighty O Sinking...

[ReefHound]

Uh, have I missed something, or is it just so blatant that the whole world--Greenpeace, Navy, and all--has failed to think about it?

Has anyone done PCB studies on NON-reef military and civilian shipwrecks? (In other words, those sunk in warfare and through accident.) Those ships have far more of the contaminated materials (plastics, etc...) than the Oriskany, which was largely (but not completely) stripped of these substances. It seems to me that type of study would provide an accurate baseline for the rate and dangerousness of PCB's to the environment. It would also go a long way towards shaping procedures and practices far into the future.

That's why the enviro groups don't want to do those kinds of studies. It might kill their whole argument. Those groups perpetually "raise questions" but don't like to see answers. They kill ideas by stalemating them and studying them to death.

 

[dpbishop]

Several points to consider in this discussion.

1. It's not a question of the navy spending the extra bucks to remove the wire. It they add that to the cost already incurred, the artificial reef program becomes more expensive than other options, like shipyard dismantling. So the question is, does the potential problem of PCB pollution outweigh the known benefits of the artificial reef program.

2. PCB's are heavier than water. They sink into the muck and only threaten to enter the food chain if they are stirred up. Given that the depth of the bottom is well below recreational limits, the only divers risking mutation will be the radical DIR tri-mix crowd, who, as we all know, have perfect buoyancy control and never stir up the bottom.

3. Don’t knock mutation. It’s how we all got here.

 

[Nemrod]

What I am trying to figure out is why Greenpeace is not concerned with Florida's new deal, selling off ocean bottom for cemetaries?

The gist of numerous other posts is that the United Stares is the big evil doer in the world. You know, that does not play well and gets kind of old when anyone can look around and see the thrid world, Russia, France, China, North Korea and most of the middle eastern countires do virtually nothing to preserve the environment. Signing treaties, whatever, actions speak louder than words, I don't see any of the large scale pollution events as occur regularly in China and India occuring in the US at least not intentionally and there they are intentional. We are not the problem and I don't care what Al Goron "feels". N

 

[Jim Ernst]

i would /will dive the ORISKANY, though i do hope that greenpeeheads are wrong and that we arent dummping pcb into our ocean, and no i am not against greenpeace, its just that they seem to be way over board sometimes!!!

 

[Daryl Morse]

PS-You do realize that the US military is the largest polluter in the world, right?

Let me guess, you read that in a Greenpeace publication. :lol:

 

[Daryl Morse]

I think we should make artificial reefs out of the Greenpeace fleet.

I guess the French were ahead of their time when they sunk the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour.

 

[DiverBuoy]

I've found old wires under water. It took some cleaning to figure out it was plastic coated wire but it was. Even if it has PCBs and they can leach, it will have to leach out of the plastic, into the orano slime crust and be released into the water as that species reproduces and lets go it's offspring which have bio accumulated it. Seems like a pretty slow process to me......

... and slow definitely makes it safe ... perhaps you've heard the polar ice caps are melting ... who cares about the future, its just too distant to worry about. <sigh>.

 

[Vayu]

3. Don’t knock mutation. It’s how we all got here

If by we you mean you and the rest of the hive...

As far as I am concerned, I'm sleeping with one eye open and a hatchet.

 

[Dean810]

Anyone who is not concerned about what we throw in our oceans and waterways simply isn't thinking. There is plenty of concern already over the amount of man-made chemicals showing up in marine life all over the world. We need to know what the effect these chemicals have. We already know that some of these chemicals are harmful.

To say, "I don't care, that fish looks ok to me, and I want a new place to dive" is just irresponsible. My 2 cents

 

[ReefHound]

Anyone who is not concerned about what we throw in our oceans and waterways simply isn't thinking. There is plenty of concern already over the amount of man-made chemicals showing up in marine life all over the world. We need to know what the effect these chemicals have. We already know that some of these chemicals are harmful.

To say, "I don't care, that fish looks ok to me, and I want a new place to dive" is just irresponsible. My 2 cents

Of course we are concerned with what goes into the water. But to project that onto this specific issue is just as irresponsible. The contaminants on the O are statistically insignificant with respect to the millions of tons that go into the water through ocean dumping and merchant shipping accidents.

We don';t need to study this issue to death as a delaying tactic. There have been plenty of wrecks to study for the last 50 years.