Posted by Eyes Only at zeb.zqwdrqsz.com on October 17, 2003 at 11:31:54:
In Reply to: Re: My persoanl shitstorm.... posted by CoreyY on October 17, 2003 at 11:16:55:
: For those of us not in the UK who are unfamiliar with the story, why don't you enlighten us as to what you think is being distorted and what information is false? Is it a huge problem that's being downplayed and over looked...or the opposite?
~~OK
The sample this whole story is based on is of dubious origin - I have the Greenpeace analysis report (I'm a an explosives chemist and I do know about this stuff, OK?) and of the 105 chemicals supposedly identified, 98 of them are petrochemical - yeah, 'cos the guy who took the 'sample' put it in his gas can. Of the rest, two of them are the internal standards added to the sample because the 'automatic' system used for analysis needs to lock onto them.
I accept that the other 5 do originate from the TNT plant - but the analysis is purely qualitative - there was no measurement of the actual concentrations involved - so how the 'analyst' make stsements about the quantities present, I have no idea. ("It looks like it" is probably the answer. The limit of solubility of TNT in ditchwater is 128 ppm - parts per million, i.e. 0.0128% - so that is the maximum concentration that could have been found.)
The chemical species identified do not appear on any of the lists of 'banned' toxic substances. The article states that the discharge is into a river running through a nature reserve, which is just not true.
The distortions and misrepresentations just go on...
Sorry!