By AMANDA BENSEN
Published in The Post-Star
Monday, March 12, 2007
The word "dredging" stirs up strong emotions in communities along the Hudson River, where PCB contamination has kept a 200-mile stretch of the river on the National Priorities List of hazardous waste sites for 23 years.
The question seems obvious, though the answer isn't: If it's been a top federal priority for that long, why isn't the river clean yet?
Some place the blame on General Electric, the company responsible for the pollution, which balked at undertaking an expensive dredging project until the federal Environmental Protection Agency ordered the cleanup in 2002.
"If GE had cooperated years ago, in my opinion, we would be done with it by now," said Rich Schiafo, environmental project manager for Scenic Hudson.
Others have criticized the EPA for taking too long to force GE into action, or local officials for trying to wrangle control from the federal agency. Even the environment itself has been blamed -- the EPA cited "the seasonal nature of the work" when it announced last month that the dredging would be pushed back for another year.
General Electric says it has cooperated with the EPA, but a project of such size and complexity is bound to take time.
"Keep in mind that it's the largest environmental dredging project ever undertaken in the United States," said General Electric spokesperson Mark Behan.
It isn't the first such project, however. A similar effort has been taking place in the Housatonic River of western Massachusetts for years. Although the two projects are not identical, they both involve dredging to remove river sediment contaminated with PCBs from General Electric plants.
Has the Housatonic cleanup been delayed as much as the Hudson cleanup?
"To be very honest, that probably depends on who you ask," said David Deegan, a spokesperson or the EPA's Region 1 office, which oversees the Housatonic project. "In any sort of cleanup like this, it's typical that EPA will try to build in as much public involvement as we can. Frankly, that doesn't necessarily speed the process, but it's really important."
Tim Gray, director of a community action group called Housatonic River Initiative, said there was "a long period of stalling" by GE about cleaning up the river, but action was rapid once the company reached a consent decree with the EPA in 2000.
Gray said the issue really heated up in the late 1990s, when PCB-contaminated soil from the plant was discovered in playgrounds and backyards throughout the town of Pittsfield."As you can imagine, parents were not very happy," Gray said. His group successfully nominated the Housatonic River site for inclusion on the registry of Superfund sites in 1997.
"Superfund is the only way the government can sort of hold a hammer over a corporation's head, because if they don't clean up, the government will do it, and bill them," Gray said. "And getting Superfund [see correction] woke up the city leaders, because they saw it as a stigma."
Then, GE became the target of a grand jury investigation for concealing memos from the EPA about which local properties contained PCB-contaminated soil from its plant. Pittsfield's PCB problem was suddenly a national news story, Gray said, adding to the public pressure for cleanup action.
"Once GE finally agreed to do it, the cleanup has been moving along about as fast as it could possibly happen," he said. "It's been seven years, but the steamshovels have been working overtime, you know?"
Two miles of the Housatonic have been dredged since 1999, and contaminated soil has been removed or capped on many residential and commercial properties.The next cleanup phase will address what the EPA calls "Rest of River," a 135-mile section stretching to Connecticut, and GE's participation in that has not been decided yet -- much like in the Hudson, where the company has only consented to an initial cleanup phase.
In Gray's view, one of the big differences between the Housatonic and Hudson projects is the scope of the cleanup.In Pittsfield, the Superfund designation includes the surrounding floodplain and the GE plant itself, while the Hudson site does not.
Schiafo and Gray said they both believe PCB soil contamination exists throughout the Hudson floodplain, but in a less localized and high-profile context than at the Housatonic site.
"They just haven't looked as hard in the Hudson," Schiafo said. "It's been much more spread out (in the Hudson), and contamination hasn't been found next to parks and schools. When you're finding PCBs under a swingset, it's a much worsepublic relations issue than finding them at the bottom of a river."
Another major difference is that GE provided Pittsfield with a major economic development package as part of the consent decree agreement for the Housatonic site.In addition to funding the cleanup, the company agreed to fund a $50 million brownfield redevelopment of the former plant and provide $15 million cash for ecosystem resoration in the region.
Town officials in Fort Edward, where the Hudson River sediment processing facility will be located, are well aware of that difference.
"We know the Pittsfield site has certainly set a precedent as far as benefits to the host community," said Fort Edward Town Supervisor Merrilyn Pulver. "That project is, of course, much smaller. ... Given that this is the largest environmental dredge project in history, it certainly would seem appropriate that we are compensated accordingly."
She said the town is working with the EPA, GE and Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand on the issue.
"I'm just going to simply say that we feel ... we're in a David-and-Goliath situation," Pulver said.
Construction of the Fort Edward facility is expected to begin within weeks, although GE is still negotiating a lease to the property. Dredging is scheduled to start in 2009 and last six years, said EPA Region 2 spokesperson David Kluesner.The delays have been "frustrating at times" for the EPA as well as the public, he added.
"We would like to be out there today; that would be a great thing," Kluesner said. "But I think it's important to make sure it's done right ... and we're moving forward."
But activists like Schiafo, who has been intensely involved in the dredging debate for the past decade, fear the delays aren't over yet.
"I hate to be pessimistic, but there have been a lot of monkey wrenches thrown in throughout this process," he said. "I'll believe it when I see it."
LOGGING ON:
More information on the Housatonic River PCB cleanup is available on the EPA's Web site: www.epa.gov/region01/ge/
More information on the Hudson River PCB cleanup: www.epa.gov/hudson/
General Electric also provides information on both projects: www.ge.com/en/citizenship/ehs/remedial/index.htm
Showing posts with label dredging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dredging. Show all posts
Monday, March 12, 2007
Bacteria found that eats PCBs
By AMANDA BENSEN
Published in The Post-Star (A1)
March 12, 2007
Researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute announced last week they had discovered bacteria capable of naturally breaking down PCBs.
Dr. Donna Bedard, an RPI biology professor who led the work, said the research is "years away" from being a viable alternative to dredging, but it is a groundbreaking step. This is the first time bacteria have been found capable of dechlorinating complex commercial PCB mixtures, such as those found in contaminated river sediment, she said.
The bacteria, known as Dehalococcoides (Dhc), can grow only by removing chlorines from compounds known as halogenated organics, most of which are toxic, explained Bedard.
Dhc bacteria are anaerobic --they cannot survive in the presence of oxygen -- but seem to thrive on PCBs, a type of halogenated organic.
Bedard's research used sediment samples from the Housatonic River in western Massachusetts, which, like the Hudson River, was contaminated with PCBs from a General Electric factory several decades ago.
EPA and GE spokespeople said that while the new research is promising, it does not change the plan to dredge PCB-contaminated sediments from the Hudson beginning in 2009.
"I think it's exciting ... but it sounds like it's not commercially viable at this point," said David Kluesner, a spokesperson for EPA's Region 5 office. "We're always keeping our eyesand ears open for newtechnologies, but to our knowledge, there's nothing available that is proven to work on a large scale."
"We're moving ahead with the dredging project that EPA has selected," said Mark Behan, a GE spokesperson. He noted that GE has funded research about natural PCB dechlorination for years at its laboratory in Niskayuna, where Bedard worked until 2000. He said most scientists agree that PCBs break down in the environment over time.
"The good news is that these natural processes are occuring naturally every day, including, we believe, in the Hudson," he said.
Environmentalists dispute that assertion, however.
"The bad news is that they're just washing downriver," said Rich Schiafo, environmental project manager for Scenic Hudson. "They don't break down. That's why, even though they were banned more than 30 years ago, they're still a serious environmental problem."
Bedard said although "PCB dechlorinating bacteria occur naturally in PCB-contaminated sediments, the challenge is to learn enough about them to be able to promote their activity so they do the job."
The next step in the research process, she said, is to identify a second bacteria that can break down the rest of the chlorine molecules, since Dhc onlyworks on five to nine chlorines per molecule. Bedard also plans to study the particular enzymes in Dhc which appear to be linked to dechlorination, called reductive dehalogenases.
Published in The Post-Star (A1)
March 12, 2007
Researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute announced last week they had discovered bacteria capable of naturally breaking down PCBs.
Dr. Donna Bedard, an RPI biology professor who led the work, said the research is "years away" from being a viable alternative to dredging, but it is a groundbreaking step. This is the first time bacteria have been found capable of dechlorinating complex commercial PCB mixtures, such as those found in contaminated river sediment, she said.
The bacteria, known as Dehalococcoides (Dhc), can grow only by removing chlorines from compounds known as halogenated organics, most of which are toxic, explained Bedard.
Dhc bacteria are anaerobic --they cannot survive in the presence of oxygen -- but seem to thrive on PCBs, a type of halogenated organic.
Bedard's research used sediment samples from the Housatonic River in western Massachusetts, which, like the Hudson River, was contaminated with PCBs from a General Electric factory several decades ago.
EPA and GE spokespeople said that while the new research is promising, it does not change the plan to dredge PCB-contaminated sediments from the Hudson beginning in 2009.
"I think it's exciting ... but it sounds like it's not commercially viable at this point," said David Kluesner, a spokesperson for EPA's Region 5 office. "We're always keeping our eyesand ears open for newtechnologies, but to our knowledge, there's nothing available that is proven to work on a large scale."
"We're moving ahead with the dredging project that EPA has selected," said Mark Behan, a GE spokesperson. He noted that GE has funded research about natural PCB dechlorination for years at its laboratory in Niskayuna, where Bedard worked until 2000. He said most scientists agree that PCBs break down in the environment over time.
"The good news is that these natural processes are occuring naturally every day, including, we believe, in the Hudson," he said.
Environmentalists dispute that assertion, however.
"The bad news is that they're just washing downriver," said Rich Schiafo, environmental project manager for Scenic Hudson. "They don't break down. That's why, even though they were banned more than 30 years ago, they're still a serious environmental problem."
Bedard said although "PCB dechlorinating bacteria occur naturally in PCB-contaminated sediments, the challenge is to learn enough about them to be able to promote their activity so they do the job."
The next step in the research process, she said, is to identify a second bacteria that can break down the rest of the chlorine molecules, since Dhc onlyworks on five to nine chlorines per molecule. Bedard also plans to study the particular enzymes in Dhc which appear to be linked to dechlorination, called reductive dehalogenases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)