http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2014/02...ts-riverfront/
hope not
Printable View
Am wondering how feasible it would be for the Marathon Refinery to store
the petcoke on the buffer land that they have been buying from the adjacent
neighborhoods. It would preferably be in an enclosed area or at worst, under
a tarp. If need be, they could expand their buffer. I think there is already
a loading dock for fuel ships by the refinery - am wondering if that can be
adapted for petcoke ships. Am wondering if it can be used as fuel by the
nearby DTE plant by the mouth of the Rouge River or the Coke Battery on
Zug Island. Google Maps shows coal piles on Zug Island.
The petcoke piles are in the news again - should they be covered up?
https://www.freep.com/story/news/loc...st/2881924002/
On SOME other petcoke thread which I can't locate right now, I posted
this [[there were other good posts in favor of covering the petcoke piles
too).
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/featu...izon-oil-spill
PAHs are found in petcoke. I don't know that petcoke PAHs
would be more benign than oil spill PAHs.
This is for those who think petcoke is somehow like regular
garden soil - it is not, and if you are not familiar with the
environmental health science term "PM2.5" [[2.5 micron
sized particulate matter) please briefly Google it, check it
out.
I don't get it. Whether it is toxic or not, it should be covered up just like there are all kinds of regulations on construction sites to prevent dirt and debris from blowing into neighborhoods. Like, how is this even still a debate?
In any case, there are new sheriffs in town at the state level. This won't be a debate for too much longer. Don't have random particulate sh%t blowing around neighborhoods, toxic or otherwise. Period.
Is this a problem because it involves Maroun and Koch Bros.? Or because...
...per the Windsor Star article.Quote:
Although not officially listed as a toxic or hazardous product, it can contain heavy metals or sulphur, according to experts.
Seems like its harder each day to know what's really going on. Do people really dislike the pet coke storage because its harardous? Or because of who is behind it?
Do activists really hate pipelines? Or is it about stopping refining of the oilsands in Canada?
Is this about pet coke, or about stopping the refining of the oilseeds in Canada?
When I hear outrage about anything now, you have to look at least one play ahead in the chess game -- because the real battle isn't usually the move in front of you.
[[All of this said, I'd think some dust control is in order here too. My comments are not meant to say there's not an issue here -- just that the reason this particular thing is an issue may be environmental politics about something else.)
Let's not look at it from a political perspective... and just environmental...
With over $700 million in fines... the Koch brothers don't even deserve consideration for their actions...
https://violationtracker.goodjobsfir...och-industries
Would you be able to separate the issues of “hazardous” and “who is behind it” if that shit was blowing around your family and home?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch
I could not.
When people make classic red herring statements like that, it's best to just ignore them. It is literally irrelevant. The problem isn't that people are opposing this because of the Kochs, and if they were, so the hell what? Sometimes, your political beliefs meet up and marry an actual problem.
We just had a foul stench blow over the city from a malfunctioning flare at Marathon a few weeks ago. The city and state got on them, and now they are working to get the problem fixed. That's how it should be. And that was just a smell. Some folks, however, don't seem to think rules apply to them; they need to be dealt with accordingly.
I am conjuring memories of Wayne Soap. Ah, the aroma!
It appear that council is more concern about the preventing the Smokey and the Bandit’s Trans Am from jumping a ramp at the Autorama than they are about this Pet coke. What a bunch of incompetent babies.
Another hot take from you. This is literally not true if you've watched them at all. The difference is that one is an easy problem to deal with as they have direct/immediate control over the issue, and the other is wrangling with a corporation with more money than god who has shown a complete disregard for even existing rules and law. Why you felt the need to bump this for such a useless comment is beyond me. You go tell Councilwoman Castaneda-Lopez who has been leading this fight for years that they aren't really doing anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by stasu1213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dexlin
Other than lip service and re-election, where are we with this?
I literally just described why so little has been done, and it's not for lack of trying on the city's end. Be smarter. More than that, it's is absolutely rich some of your disingenous folks are acting like you care about this issue; you don't and never did. You want to point the finger? Then point it at the folks letting this shit blow around and flouting the law and regulations.