• Call me a bleeding-heart treehugger, but am I the only one who’s worried about the millions of gallons of sludge and toxic wast being pumped into Louisiana waterways? We now have a situation where New Orleans has been turned into a toxic cesspool of raw sewage, oil, chemicals, and bacteria. Every can of paint thinner someone had sitting in their garage has been oozing out into the floodwater, and packages of spoiled meat sit rotting in the hot Louisiana sun.

    If your skin so much as touches the water, you are assured of getting an infection, so I’m wondering why nobody is asking questions about the long-term environmental impact of simply pumping all this sludge and biohazard waste back into lakes and rivers? Granted, I understand that it needs to be cleaned up, and I don’t pretend to know how one might go about detoxifying all that waste, but I do feel that it is important to evaluate the impact before simply dumping all that toxic mess out into the environment.

    If anyone knows of any measures being taken to protect the environment during the cleanup effort, please post a comment. I would love to hear about it.

    This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 7th, 2005 at 4:41 pm and is filed under Highlights. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
  • 10 Comments

    Take a look at some of the responses we've had to this article.

    1. What About the Environment?

      What About the Environment?

    2. al
      Sep 8th
      Reply

      Ok, i’m going to point out here that you mentioned rotting meat, but not the thousands of dead bodies in that water. But that’s not what I came to write here … what I wanted to say is: what are they gonna do? run it through a brita filter? come on! Not to mention that alot of that pollution would have already been pulled back out into the ocean with the receding storm surge, so what’s the point? It’s just another grain of sand on the ant hill.

      I would like to thank you though for not using the word neo-conservative or neocon in this posting. It has become very tiring to hear the same word over and over and over again, especially when it’s clear you’re not entirely sure what the word means as evidenced by your “god angry with neo-conservative southerners” story when if you knew what it meant, you’d see that the people most affected by Katrina were the furthest thing possible from neo-conservatives. Try looking it up on wikipedia. That’s my rant for the day. And you thought I was miffed at lunch ;-)

    3. Sep 9th
      Reply

      Al…you big Neo-Conservative dork.

    4. Yeah. Only neo-conservatives compare rotting bodies in the water to grains of sand on an ant hill.

      Of course, there would be more outrage among neo-conservatives if a large number of golf courses in the south were under water. We all know how neocons love golf…

    5. Sep 12th
      Reply

      Will someone give Al a lesson on satire? I tell you what Al… Why don’t you try looking up that word on wikipedia.

      Satire, Al… Learn it, know it, live it.

    6. al
      Sep 13th
      Reply

      how are we supposed to know this is satire? It certainly isn’t funny and it’s not tagged as satire like your “god angry with neoconservative southerners” story was. I don’t honestly believe this qualifies as satirical writing.

    7. Sep 13th
      Reply

      This story is not satire… However “god angry with neoconservative southerners” is, and that is the story you pointed to as evidence of my not knowing what the term Neo-Conservative means.

      You said, and I quote:

      “it’s clear you’re not entirely sure what the word means as evidenced by your “god angry with neo-conservative southerners” story”

      In fact, I’m not really sure why you chose to comment on this story and not “god angry with neoconservative southerners” since that is clearly the one you are taking issue with.

    8. I’m angry with neo-conservative southerners too. But I’m not god.

      Oink!

    9. al
      Sep 13th
      Reply

      Your comment made it sound as though this was the story you were saying was satire, my mistake. Truth be told, I would have posted on the other story, but you who wrote it took it down after you realized like everyone else that it was done in poor taste and really wasn’t funny. And it’s not that article I really have a beef with, I think you know that, but now you’re just trying to piss me off ;-) And for some reason I just keep falling for it …

    10. augustine
      Jan 1st
      Reply

      I’m kinda siding with the conspiracy nuts, but it looks like BushCo is undoing much of the EPA.

      The “Twin Towers” were rife with asbestos, but the air was OK to breathe around ground zero.

      Since when is a battleship or aircraft carrier an “artificial reef” and not a rusty scrap dump?
      It’s like saying the old car on the front lawn is a wildlife sanctuary, because there’s a racoon in it.

      What I’m trying to say is no one cares anymore.

      Pick up a scuba diving magazine, all glossy travel photos of exoctic pacific iles, in the ’70s they stressed ecology and clean up dives.

      Most people with money are too superficial to care, those without are too busy eeking out a living in dead end jobs.

      As I get older, I’m turning into my parents!

  • Leave a Reply

    Let us know what you thought.

  • Name (required):

    Email (required):

    Website:

    Message:

Visitors have tagged this post: about (10) - environmental satire (3) - katrina (2) - red cross (2) - protect environment satire (1) - neoconservatives environment (1) - neoconservative environment (1) - satirical environment (1) - whipped magazine satire (1) - Graph Spoiled meat (1) - bush & toxic wast (1) - Hurricane Mini Truck (1) - "biohazard waste" in oceans (1) - spiral bounds (1) - toxic wast in the oceans (1) - detoxifying hurricane katrina (1) - hurricane katrina (1) - new orleans (1) - ecology and biohazard waste (1) -