The Cellar - 7/12/2003: Bridge over foam

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Image of the Day (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - 7/12/2003: Bridge over foam (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=3663)

Well, you would have to modify the business plan a little bit. Mostly, he would have to stop stealing free stuff -- of course there wouldn't be any money in that!

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
If Count Zero is still reading he surely knows more about this -- it's just south of where he lives. CZ, got some better facts?

Ok, here it goes. The Tietê river is the most polluted river in the world (I think the second one is -- or was -- the Thames river in London). It's absolutely disgusting. I've never seen foam like that, but, believe me, that makes it a bit <i>less</i> disgusting. You don't want to have a close look at it and you definitely don't want to smell it. They widened the river last year, but before that there were sometimes these floods... Well I don't want to describe it. :-]

The most bizarre thing is that by the time it reaches the ocean, it's absolutely clean! A friend of mine actually swam in the river and drank water from it several (and several) kilometers away from the city, and the fact that he is still alive and not horribly mutated proves it was quite clean. He said the water was transparent, but I wouldn't dare coming close anyway. This proves a very depressing (and a bit hopeful) point that the only measure necessary to unpollute the river is to stop polluting it, and nature will take care of the rest.

The government started a movement to unpollute it about 10 years ago (they even hired the same company that supposedly did a good job on the Thames), but it went stale, since the amount of work in the sewer system necessary to stop the pollution was absolutely huge.

Hi there ;) just noticed your reference to the Thames River (which is clean now by the way) and thought I'd post This Link for your information ... my I'm feeling helpful today :D

Chris_MC

Excellent link, Chris.:thumb:

"Julie said to jim why don't we jump in
While the water is cool and we are still friends"

-Lloyd Cole & the Commotions "Speedboat"

That's a great link, but I've been there, and there is NO way you could get me into that water.

At least it hasn't caught fire yet.

<img src="http://www.epa.gov/region2/epa30/images/cuyah.jpg">

/embarrassed Ohioan

On the upside, there's no mosquitos. :D

OK, this may have been discussed before, but I've always wondered:

If a river is so polluted it burns, why not let it burn, and in the process, burn the impurites out?

(I know I could probably have asked that better, but I'm getting ready for work, so I'm in a hurry.)

Isn't fire one of the better natural cleansers? When the fuel is gone, the fire will go out, yes? I say let it burn, and in the meantime, the shame of whole situation is on the communities and surrounding areas that allowed the water to get so polluted in the first place.

I think it's ludicrous to put out a river fire with WATER, when that infusion of fresh water may have prevented such horrible conditions, and I won't go into the whole "shouldn't have let it get so dirty in the first damn place" argument.

The problem with any unchecked fire is collateral damage. That river fire only burned for 20 minutes and still managed to damage two railroad bridges.:eek:

I understand that, but I don't feel any pity for that "collateral damage". If the railroad had interest in the river, maybe they should have been part of a solution to ensure things like that didn't happen.

The problem is that it's never that simple. That railroad could be delivering essential grain and other foodstuffs to people that need it. Or it may be the most affordable way for a poor woman to make it across the country to visit her dying son.

Another good reason why everyone should be involved in keeping our planet in good condition and for ALL of us to be concerned about these types of problems.