Question on Decontaminating New Orleans Pooled Flood Water

[McGyver]

Perhaps someone with experience in water management might answer this question regarding the prospects of treating the soiled water in New Orleans while it pooled in the city, though now is a mute point.

 

What is the feasibility and a possible protocol for adding chlorine, surfactants, or specific decontaminents to the pooled water in the 1st few days to reduce bacteria/toxicity levels for things like E-Coli and petrochemicals? Could any have been used w/o posing health risks to the population?

 

Secondly, would decontamination of this pooled water in the city have provided some benefit to lessening the subsequent environmental damage to Lake Pont. and the Gulf of Mexico?

 

Thanks

[infamous]

Perhaps someone with experience in water management might answer this question regarding the prospects of treating the soiled water in New Orleans while it pooled in the city, though now is a mute point.

 

What is the feasibility and a possible protocol for adding chlorine, surfactants, or specific decontaminents to the pooled water in the 1st few days to reduce bacteria/toxicity levels for things like E-Coli and petrochemicals? Could any have been used w/o posing health risks to the population?

 

Secondly, would decontamination of this pooled water in the city have provided some benefit to lessening the subsequent environmental damage to Lake Pont. and the Gulf of Mexico?

 

Thanks

You've asked two very good questions McGyver. I'm sure the answer to the second would be an affirmative, however, the absolute volume of all this water is probably what makes this solution nonfeasable. I'm not sure what volume we are talking about but here, it must be an enormous quanity to be able to treat effectively.

[Buffy]

...and I suspect its something of a moot point, since they're pumping the soup unfiltered into Lake Ponch. as fast as they can! City coverage went down from 80% to 60% in 24 hours...

 

Cheers,

Buffy

[McGyver]

I wanted to follow up an elbaorate on my original concern as to whether decontamination of the contaminated flood waters in New Orleans would have been advisable, and what lies ahead for that region as a result of these dangerous waters. I am NOT an expert per sey in water and waste management, but have health policy experience.

 

We can break the issues presented by the contaminated water into four (4) primary isses: 1) Health risks to those and recovery personnel exposed to the flood waters; 2) Environmental damage to Lake Pont and the Gulf of Mexico; 3) Health risks presented to those living and recreationing on Lake Pont; and 4) Long term contamination of homes, structures, and soil in the flooded areas.

 

At this juncture, I am most concerned and curious how cleanup officials will handle items #3 and #4. I don't know if Lake Pont has the volume of water to assimilate the amount of toxinx being dumped into the lake. I believe it is a relatively shallow lake. I suspect residents there will be given extensive instructions as to exposure in and around the lake. It is warm, so bacteria levels may persist for some time. Metals and petrochemicals likely will eventually settle in the lake bottom and present longer term issues to fish from the lake.

 

Now, the bad news on the city. Given the reports of high levels of lead, bacteria, and petrochemicals in the flood waters, I suspect that affected structures may have to be completely removed, and large amounts of ground soil removed. Again, I am not an expert in this area, but I am familiar with environmental standards that apply to housing - and even mold following flooded homes can give cause to leveling a home.

 

I write the above as I am surprised at the absense of any news discussion on the health and safety steps that are likely to follow the cleanup efforts. Displaced residents should be informed on what lies ahead. Please correct any inaccuracies in my assessment above.

[Turtle]

I write the above as I am surprised at the absense of any news discussion on the health and safety steps that are likely to follow the cleanup efforts. Displaced residents should be informed on what lies ahead. Please correct any inaccuracies in my assessment above.

___I have heard some discussion on this, in fact this is why they want EVERYBODY out. There is no quick fix, & whether its the toxins & bacteria that gets you or the chemicals used for cleanup, the place is for all intents & purposes safely uninhabitable for the general public. Just wait 'til those who stay start suing over their poor health. :shrug: Why in the name of reason would you rebuild a city below sea level? ;) Good money after bad. ;)

[damocles]

McGyver

 

Perhaps someone with experience in water management might answer this question regarding the prospects of treating the soiled water in New Orleans while it pooled in the city, though now is a mute point.

 

It certainly is.

 

What is the feasibility and a possible protocol for adding chlorine, surfactants, or specific decontaminents to the pooled water in the 1st few days to reduce bacteria/toxicity levels for things like E-Coli and petrochemicals? Could any have been used w/o posing health risks to the population?

 

No.

 

Secondly, would decontamination of this pooled water in the city have provided some benefit to lessening the subsequent environmental damage to Lake Pont. and the Gulf of Mexico?

 

Might, if you could do it.

 

McGyver

 

I wanted to follow up an elbaorate on my original concern as to whether decontamination of the contaminated flood waters in New Orleans would have been advisable, and what lies ahead for that region as a result of these dangerous waters. I am NOT an expert per sey in water and waste management, but have health policy experience.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4223426.stm

 

We can break the issues presented by the contaminated water into four (4) primary isses: 1) Health risks to those and recovery personnel exposed to the flood waters; 2) Environmental damage to Lake Pont and the Gulf of Mexico; 3) Health risks presented to those living and recreationing on Lake Pont; and 4) Long term contamination of homes, structures, and soil in the flooded areas.

 

Based on the hydrology and the geography? 1 and 2? Minimal. 3 and 4? You drain all flooded areas and aerate. You turn the the soil. Plant marsh grass. Pump the sewage into the gulf away from coastal fisheries. Burn the dead. Raze the houses.

 

At this juncture, I am most concerned and curious how cleanup officials will handle items #3 and #4. I don't know if Lake Pont has the volume of water to assimilate the amount of toxinx being dumped into the lake. I believe it is a relatively shallow lake. I suspect residents there will be given extensive instructions as to exposure in and around the lake. It is warm, so bacteria levels may persist for some time. Metals and petrochemicals likely will eventually settle in the lake bottom and present longer term issues to fish from the lake.

 

Build a 2 billion dollar sewage treatment plant complex and pump the lake through it.

 

Now, the bad news on the city. Given the reports of high levels of lead, bacteria, and petrochemicals in the flood waters, I suspect that affected structures may have to be completely removed, and large amounts of ground soil removed. Again, I am not an expert in this area, but I am familiar with environmental standards that apply to housing - and even mold following flooded homes can give cause to leveling a home.

 

Agreed.

 

I write the above as I am surprised at the absense of any news discussion on the health and safety steps that are likely to follow the cleanup efforts. Displaced residents should be informed on what lies ahead. Please correct any inaccuracies in my assessment above.

 

Not to badly exaggerated, but the cleanup is not as dire as some want to predict. Figure eighty billion dollars if you include the backfill.(See below.)

 

By Turtle Quote:

 

___I have heard some discussion on this, in fact this is why they want EVERYBODY out. There is no quick fix, & whether its the toxins & bacteria that gets you or the chemicals used for cleanup, the place is for all intents & purposes safely uninhabitable for the general public. Just wait 'til those who stay start suing over their poor health. Why in the name of reason would you rebuild a city below sea level? Good money after bad.

 

1. You have to be careful of reportage. Most of the nimrods babbling out of New Orleans tend to exaggerate the wrong issues and neglect other factors. There is a huge environmental catastrophe called SOUTHERN LOUISIANA and MISSISSIPPI that has been ignored.

 

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i36/8336disaster.html

 

2. Ask the good people of Louisiana.

 

3. We have to rebuild. Almost a quarter of our petrochemical industry is there(the Gulf oil platforms-600+ of them)

 

4. As to rebuilding in the below sea level bowl that surrounds the high ground that is the French Quarter and the old city? Fill it. Barge in spoilage and mine tailings and fill it. You have to build a reef and dike system to restore the wetlands that you need to shield upper Louisiana from the gulf anyway, now that you've poisoned the marshlands to the south of the Big Easy by failing to reef and dike before the hurricane, so you might as well go whole hog as they say, and bury the low ground under a manmade saddle plateau feature

 

Thats about forty billion dollars.

 

Who said Katrina would cost $125 billion? (scoffing)

[McGyver]

After weeks of water sampling, I am yet to see a verifiable story of the bacteria and toxin levels in the flood water coming out of New Orleans. Some recent reports have said the toxocity levels were less than initially thought. Yet in contrast, news reports today paint a dismal picture of health and safety issues relating to when residents might return. Has anyone seen a reliable toxicity report?

[damocles]

http://www.epa.gov/katrina/index.html

 

http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/epalink?logname=epahome&referrer=topstories&target=http://www.epa.gov/katrina/testresults/chem/090305/chem2005_09_03.html

 

http://www.epa.gov/katrina/testresults/water.html

 

http://www.epa.gov/katrina/testresults/air.html

[McGyver]

Thanks democles for the EPA data links.

 

Though recent flood water health reports, including, the EPA links you include above, identify relatively safe conditions for residents to return to New Orleans - there still remains some prevailing concern as to how safe the submerged city is respective to lead, bacteria, mold, petrochemical residue, and collapsable structures.

 

It looks like "Hurricane Rita" is buying more time for the residents and officials in making the ultimate decision of when, and how.

 

Regretfully, I think that Mayor Nagan should not move forward or speak out publicly any further on this subject - until official health and safety details are worked out bu federal officials.

[damocles]

Thanks democles for the EPA data links.

 

Your welcome.

 

Though recent flood water health reports, including, the EPA links you include above, identify relatively safe conditions for residents to return to New Orleans - there still remains some prevailing concern as to how safe the submerged city is respective to lead, bacteria, mold, petrochemical residue, and collapsable structures.

 

Short answer;

Lead-flushoff-still longterm(decades): health hazard; low, continuous.

Bacteria-we know how to deal with this; impact minimal.

Mold-we know how to deal with this; impact minimal.

Petrochemical residue-same as lead.

Collapsable structures-assessments, then bulldozers.

 

It looks like "Hurricane Rita" is buying more time for the residents and officials in making the ultimate decision of when, and how.

 

I hope the Texans learned from Katrina and have the sense to batten down what they can and RUN.

Regretfully, I think that Mayor Nagan should not move forward or speak out publicly any further on this subject - until official health and safety details are worked out by federal officials.

 

Nagin is a one termer.

I hope Blanco is likewise.

I suggest that the Louisianans do in their state what we in America should do nationally-examine if the government should be modified in light of non-performance.

 

I suggest that the DHS legislation might be a contributing cause to the FEMA disaster mitigation efforts as one example.

 

Best wishes;

[McGyver]

Now that many months have passed, including, since I first authored this thread, I felt it helpful to querry you all on your insights on what will happen to re-habitation of New Orleans.

 

In recent weeks, the city has been featured in two news topics: Most recently, a rebuilding plan (can't recal name) has become very heated and opposed by residents, city council, and even FEMA. That proposal sets up new neighborhoods, parks for water run-off, and return resident criteria - or neighborhoods will be leveled. To date, no clearing or re-building efforts have been undertaken.

 

The second story relates to news pieces CNN aired 2 weeks ago regarding the still existing toxicity levels in homes and personal belongings. One particular neighborhood was affected by leaks in a petrochemical storage tank that was left unprepared for the hurricane and flooding. There are conflicting accounts on what are safe levels of the remaining petrochemicals, and who should foot the bill.

 

Overall, much of the inner city parts of NO remains uninhabitable some 5 months following the flood. The city even had to delay elections.

 

Anyone have a crystal ball?