|
|
 | | From: | ThrillRiderOne | | Subject: | Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | 14 Jan 2005 12:48:24 -0800 |
|
|
 | New York Times, Jan 14
Steve Barnes
TEXAS: STUDY CITES CANCER RISKS IN HOUSTON Lifelong residents of
eastern Harris County, including neighborhoods in eastern and
southeastern Houston, are at significantly greater risk of developing
some forms of cancer because of toxic emissions from the area's
numerous chemical manufacturing plants, a state study said. The review
of air quality data collected in 2003 by the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality, first reported in The Houston Chronicle, said
levels of 1,3-butadiene, a chemical used in rubber production, could be
expected to produce as many as 199 cases of cancer per million people
rather than the single case that could be expected absent the
pollutants. Mayor Bill White of Houston called for hearings on the
issue and urged stronger emission standards.
------------
What kind of stupid companies let shit like that into the environment?
Sorry for people living in the chemical cesspool.
|
|
| | From: | ThrillRiderOne | | Subject: | Re: Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | 15 Jan 2005 08:51:58 -0800 |
|
|
| This kind of stupid company does:
Chevron Phillips will pay $1.8 million for Texas chemical plant
explosions
WASHINGTON (10/05/04) -- The Justice Department and the U.S. EPA have
announced a settlement with Chevron Phillips Chemical Company in which
the company will pay a record $1.8 civil penalty for Clean Air Act
violations that led to two explosions and releases of chemicals into
the air from a chemical manufacturing plant in Pasadena, Texas in 1999
and 2000. This is the largest civil penalty ever assessed for a case of
this type.
In the complaint filed simultaneously with the consent decree, the U.S.
alleged that Chevron Phillips, and/or its predecessor Phillips Chemical
Company, failed to exercise sufficient care to prevent and address
accidental releases of chemicals at the Pasadena Plastics Complex, a
plastic resin and specialty chemical manufacturing facility. Two
accidental explosions occurred, in June 1999 and March 2000, releasing
1,3 butadiene and other chemicals into the air and causing three deaths
and injuries to almost 100 workers at the facility.
----------
Smelly ass chem companies like Chevron Phillips. How can people that
work there and dump crap in the air look at themselves in the mirror
every day?
|
|
| | From: | Rastus O'Ginga | | Subject: | Re: Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:06:47 -0600 |
|
|
| On 14 Jan 2005 12:48:24 -0800, "ThrillRiderOne"
wrote:
>New York Times, Jan 14
>Steve Barnes
>
>TEXAS: STUDY CITES CANCER RISKS IN HOUSTON Lifelong residents of
>eastern Harris County, including neighborhoods in eastern and
>southeastern Houston, are at significantly greater risk of developing
>some forms of cancer because of toxic emissions from the area's
>numerous chemical manufacturing plants, a state study said. The review
>of air quality data collected in 2003 by the Texas Commission on
>Environmental Quality, first reported in The Houston Chronicle, said
>levels of 1,3-butadiene, a chemical used in rubber production, could be
>expected to produce as many as 199 cases of cancer per million people
>rather than the single case that could be expected absent the
>pollutants. Mayor Bill White of Houston called for hearings on the
>issue and urged stronger emission standards.
>------------
>What kind of stupid companies let shit like that into the environment?
>Sorry for people living in the chemical cesspool.
As with all environmental news, especailly one about Houston written
by a NYT reporter, I'd have to see some actual data before believing
anything.
Rastus O'Ginga
Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.
"What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." - Bender
ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is 100%
opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it is
doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded to
this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should use
the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole, or
in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
|
|
| | From: | ThrillRiderOne | | Subject: | Re: Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | 15 Jan 2005 21:46:22 GMT |
|
|
| >As with all environmental news, especailly one about Houston written
>by a NYT reporter, I'd have to see some actual data before believing
>anything.
Houston Chronicle series "In Harm's Way" on web page, in paper tomorrow:
http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/04/toxic/index.html
Texas Commission on Evironmental Quality:
http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/
More information there. Don't think New York Times owns either one. That
Times reporter was quoting the Chronicle for the study and reports.
|
|
| | From: | Rastus O'Ginga | | Subject: | Re: Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 17:10:48 -0600 |
|
|
| On 15 Jan 2005 21:46:22 GMT, thrillriderone@aol.com (ThrillRiderOne)
wrote:
>>As with all environmental news, especailly one about Houston written
>>by a NYT reporter, I'd have to see some actual data before believing
>>anything.
>
>Houston Chronicle series "In Harm's Way" on web page, in paper tomorrow:
>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/04/toxic/index.html
>
>Texas Commission on Evironmental Quality:
>http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/
>
>More information there. Don't think New York Times owns either one. That
>Times reporter was quoting the Chronicle for the study and reports.
Dude, when an explosion happens in a chemical plant, it's impossible
to control what is released. After all, it is an explosion.
People living near a chemical plant without a doubt have risks from
chemicals in the air. And if they aren't smart enough to realize
that, well, that's why they live near a chemical plant.
You realize that without oil, you would not have a computer to rant
about chemical plants on, right? If you want a world with convenient
plastic devices, and other things that are made possible by the
chemical industry, you must live with some risks. If you want to live
in the stone ages, without such advancements, move to central Africa.
Rastus O'Ginga
Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.
"What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." - Bender
ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is 100%
opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it is
doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded to
this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should use
the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole, or
in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
|
|
| | From: | Mike Robinson | | Subject: | Re: Cancer chemicals from Harris Co TX | | Date: | Sat, 15 Jan 2005 18:30:30 -0600 |
|
|
| Besides, it taste like chicken anyway....
"Rastus O'Ginga" wrote in message
news:tg8ju0lc4gaflhga1qojpa13t6en7gov34@4ax.com...
> On 15 Jan 2005 21:46:22 GMT, thrillriderone@aol.com (ThrillRiderOne)
> wrote:
>
>>>As with all environmental news, especailly one about Houston written
>>>by a NYT reporter, I'd have to see some actual data before believing
>>>anything.
>>
>>Houston Chronicle series "In Harm's Way" on web page, in paper tomorrow:
>>http://www.chron.com/content/chronicle/special/04/toxic/index.html
>>
>>Texas Commission on Evironmental Quality:
>>http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/
>>
>>More information there. Don't think New York Times owns either one. That
>>Times reporter was quoting the Chronicle for the study and reports.
>
> Dude, when an explosion happens in a chemical plant, it's impossible
> to control what is released. After all, it is an explosion.
>
> People living near a chemical plant without a doubt have risks from
> chemicals in the air. And if they aren't smart enough to realize
> that, well, that's why they live near a chemical plant.
>
> You realize that without oil, you would not have a computer to rant
> about chemical plants on, right? If you want a world with convenient
> plastic devices, and other things that are made possible by the
> chemical industry, you must live with some risks. If you want to live
> in the stone ages, without such advancements, move to central Africa.
>
>
>
> Rastus O'Ginga
>
> Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
> Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.
>
> "What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." -
> Bender
>
> ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
> The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is
> 100%
> opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
> coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it
> is
> doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
> own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
> their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded
> to
> this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should
> use
> the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole,
> or
> in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
> of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
>
>
|
|
|
