I received a comment from someone calling himself "Hamilton" in regard to last month's post
on the recent protest in Coaldale against the dumping of fly ash and river dredge in old mines. I'd like to bring it to readers' attention:
Although I agree that the materials being disposed are horrible and dangerous to human, animal and plant health, what else are we supposed to do with it. The material exists and it must be put somewhere. It cannot be vapourized since that would put it in the air. If its not Hometown's backyard, who's backyard is better? All people would rather it go somewhere else. Its easy to say how something is not right without offering a viable solution that takes into account things like economics, the environment and the political pressure to please everyone.
Hamilton agrees the materials in question are "horrible," yet he's willing to have them dumped them into deep, unlined pits that drain directly into our groundwater -- and dumped in a sloppy manner that allows the dust from the waste to coat surrounding communities and people's lungs.
He asks, "If its [sic] not Hometown's backyard, who's [sic] backyard is better?"
How about the backyards of those who profit from its creation?
In the meantime, we as a society need to devote our brainpower to devising solutions to our pollution problems that don't require anyone
to be dumped on and poisoned. Hamilton would probably think that's impractical. But I fail to see what's practical about current practices, which are destroying humanity's genetic legacy through the careless and short-sighted handling of mutagenic chemicals.