So-called "United Water" is actually the French Suez/Ondeo corporation, an international corporate marauder long infamous for savaging whatever water supplies they take over. Historically, Suez takes over, eliminates staff, skimps on maintenance, and sticks it to their unfortunate customers with rate hikes, destruction of ecosystems, and general arrogance. Contemplating the apparent free pass Suez is getting in the activist PR world, a series of unpleasant suspicions arise.
If Suez is machiavellian, amoral, and determined to rape the Hudson for profit, they need only compromise one or two local Green spokespersons, urging them to attack Indian Point.
Since the rigid public safety test regimes outlined in 40 CFR 141 of the federal code (below) would seem very distasteful to Suez... (translation: unprofitable), they might instigate anti-nuclear groups, as a means of feeding Hud Valley residents diluted sewer-water on the cheap, without testing, by using misdirection, gagging the NYS DEC. Check out this link from "Public Citizen".
( LINK )
The onus of protecting Hud Valley citizens falls clearly on Suez.
Indian Point does not add any detectable radioactive material to the Hudson river.
Let me repeat that for clarity: The very best detection equipment known to mankind fails to find any radioactivity beyond the normal amount, in the vicinity of Indian Point. This reduces Clearwater's assertion to:
"If imaginary fairy dust were to be found in the Hudson, would ( Suez) United Water's new Desal plant filter it out?" Short answer.....
You Can't Filter Out What Is Not There.
So is Clearwater tilting at windmills?
Or shilling for Suez/Ondeo?
Anyone interested in just what it is that Suez might be seeking to avoid, should peruse the EPA Ground Water Rule found at:
( LINK #2 )
which states that as of 12/01/2009 all water providers must assess their water sources for all contaminants, utilizing a complex flowchart given on page 12 of 96 in the document cited. Under 40 CFR 141, Parts H,P,T, & W, if their supply comes from surface water (the Hudson River) either wholly, or in part, it is to be considered GWUDI, water under the influence of surface water. As per the EPA document found at
( LINK #3 )
water systems that are declared by the State to be influenced by radionuclides must institute the following test regimes:
THE FOLLOWING IS CUT & PASTED FROM EPA:
The Radionuclides Rule requires water systems to monitor for radioactivity when:
• The system is designated by the State as vulnerable. Vulnerable systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each EPTDS (40 CFR 141.26(b)(1)). Sampling must begin the quarter after the system is notified by the State.
• The system is designated by the State as utilizing waters contaminated by effluents from nuclear facilities. These systems must collect quarterly samples for beta emitters and iodine-131, and annual samples for tritium and strontium-90 at each EPTDS (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)). More frequent monitoring is required if iodine-131 is found in finished water (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(ii)). Sampling must begin the quarter after the system is notified by the State.
For the quarterly monitoring requirements for gross beta particle activity, samples must be collected and analyzed monthly or the composite of three monthly samples must be collected and analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(i)). For the quarterly monitoring requirements for iodine-131, samples must be collected for five consecutive days, composited, and analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(ii)). For the annual monitoring requirements for tritium and strontium-90, samples must be collected quarterly and analyzed or composited and analyzed (40 CFR 141.26(b)(2)(iii)). In all cases, laboratories should be responsible for compositing the samples prior to analysis.
• The State, at its own discretion, requires the system to collect samples (40 CFR 141.26(b)).
END OF QUOTE
So, to answer Clearwater's question "Will the proposed Suez water output contain radioactivity?"
The answer, under Code of Federal Regulations 40 CFR 141 is: Suez must test, as layed out above. If the tests fail, Suez cannot operate. The onus here is on two parties not mentioned by Clearwater. First is "The State", who must officially notify Suez that they are declared to be in one of the three "must test" categories. The second, of course, is Suez, who must test as per the regimes given, and pass, or immediately cease operation (or never begin).
If Clearwater is truly for public health (and not just against Indian Point), it will urge NYS DEC to notify Suez under 10 CFR 141 that they must test, and pass, to begin operation.
(You might also convey this info to Clearwater's apparently baffled lawyers).
I'm sure Suez is 100% aware of all of this, and lobbying NYS DEC hard to not declare.
If the Hudson is contaminated, it will be criminal malfeasance for NYS DEC to allow Suez to start feeding this swill to Hud valley residents. I urge all activist leaders to get in your alert mode, and prevent such a crime. Should DEC give Suez the go-ahead, I urge Clearwater to institute its own independent test program, and not trust either Suez or DEC. Under 40 CFR 141, the tests must be done at Suez's inputs AND outputs.
Let us hope the Suez corporation has not duped Clearwater into being their Hud Valley stalking horse.
I personally would reject the sewage-laden, mercury-laced, PCB-carrying , ammonia & chlorine-dosed Hudson river as a viable drinking water source, with or without imaginary radiation.
When you realize the undrinkability of the Hudson no longer comes from brownfield industry, but from urban sewage, the frivolous aspect of Clearwater's position is exposed. While attacking a non-offending electrical plant, Clearwater is totally ignoring the vast biological injury done to the river by such sewage sources as Troy, Albany, Hudson, Catskill,Saugerties, Kingston, Poughkeepsie, Wappingers Falls,Newburgh, Peekskill, Ossining, Yonkers , NYC and many other towns.
Marine researchers worldwide are aware that ammonia and chlorine in trace amounts eradicates eggs and spawn of dozens of species in dozens of estuaries. This same biofouling is emerging as the bane of fish farms everywhere. Fish farms, and human cities both offend the estuaries in the same way. Human and piscatory waste causes bacterial blooms which deplete oxygen, and infect living organisms. Authorities attempting to suppress the waste use chlorine, which clears the water somewhat, but permanently alters river chemistry, opening the door for useless invading species to supplant local species hurt by the ammonia/chlorine combination.
(see: THIS LINK )
The ruination is huge. It is happening on every continent, in every estuary. But Pete Seeger has no song for it. Stuck in place, as older people often are, Pete maintains a 1960's attitude which is very attractive, very rousing, and totally inadequate to solving the real Hudson's real problems. Today's Hudson has no purpose. With industry gone, and no chance of returning to a wilderness past, the Hudson wallows in urban sewage, and is targeted for stifling,offensive condo development from Troy to Staten island.
Quite a vision, indeed!
Meanwhile Pete eggs us on to watch out for unfindable fairy dust! I must say that on this issue, Clearwater is waist deep in the Big Muddy, (but the big fool says to push on).
TELL ME THIS IS NOT PETE'S NEW ROLE !
WHY IS CLEARWATER ON THE WRONG SIDE? (CLICK HERE)
.
