ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THE BULK OF THE UNDISSOLVED CHLOROBENZENE (DNAPL) IS GOING TO BE WITH US FOR A VERY LONG TIME

 

Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a simple plug in formula to determine how many decades, centuries or millennia before all the free phase and residual DNAPL are finally, fully dissolved. Keep in mind the term DNAPL can also be referred to as "free phase" DNAPL when it has pooled on some sort of low permeability surface such as clay or even a silt aquitard. The term "residual" DNAPL refers more to long strings of DNAPL or even simply separated areas of pore spaces with the water in the pore spaces replaced with tiny chlorobenzene droplets. This residual DNAPL is also a long term source area of eventually dissolved chlorobenzene. 

While concentrations of chlorobenzene in the groundwater can be low such as 100, 200 or even a thousand parts per billion (ppb.) nevertheless they are all greater than the Ontario Drinking Water Standard (ODWS) for  chlorobenzene of 80 ppb.. Nearer to the DNAPL source areas concentrations however can exceed 1% of the Solubility of chlorobenzene in water which could be as high as 4,300 ppb in either pure lab water or less in already contaminated groundwater. 

I expect that some sort of mathematical calculations showing the total number of kilograms of  chlorobenzene dissolved within the aquifer is possible. That quantity could then be compared to the thousands upon thousands of gallons of chlorobenzene discharged by Uniroyal into the natural environment. Of course please don't waste my time with any calculations whatsoever done by Lanxess or GHD personnel. "You can't fool all the people all the time.".

DECADES OF MISDIRECTION, DECEPTION & MANIPULATION i.e. LYING

 

I think that I recently mentioned the also deceptive comment from a GHD operative (consultant) that CHLOROBENZENE DOES NOT EQUAL DNAPL. Boy is there some semantics and word twisting going on there. I do believe that the chlorobenzene plume under part of Elmira is not DNAPL.  It is the totally expected slow dissolution or dissolving of chlorobenzene DNAPL that was spilled or dumped by Uniroyal Chemical decades ago. Therefore all chlorobenzene in and around Elmira started as DNAPL but the DNAPL now located in saturated soil is very slowly dissolving into groundwater and those dissolved portions have changed from Non Aqueous Phase to an Aqueous (i.e. water) Phase as they migrate with the groundwater.  

A few quotes may also help to clarify. " The dissolved portion of chlorobenzene moves with the groundwater, while the larger, undissolved liquid portion will sink and can persist in the subsurface." As well there is the following:  "The adsorbed chlorobenzene in the vadose (unsaturated) and saturated zone will take a long time to disappear, liberating contamination in either the gaseous or dissolved state. The resulting plumes (gaseous or dissolved) will be relatively small in size." Finally "Chlorinated solvents have low solubility in water and are denser than water, causing them to sink and accumulate in the subsurface as DNAPLs.".   

For me these quotes from professional and academic sources published on line put things in perspective. Firstly it is clear that pump & treat remediation is plainly the cheapest and least effective  method of remediating chlorinated solvents under Elmira. This was a quote from Dave Belanger of CH2MHILL way back in the 1990s on behalf of the Region of Waterloo. Secondly we were deceived and lied to regarding chlorobenzene leaving the Uniroyal site PRIOR to dissolving in the groundwater. Serious evidence of free phase DNAPL has been found in two locations off the Uniroyal site over the years namely by the Howard St. Water Tower (OW57-32R) as well as on the Nutrite property. Since June 19/25 Jesse Wright of Arcadis has stated that there are another approximate half dozen locations of chlorobenzene DNAPL south-west of the Uniroyal site near First St, Union St. and Howard Ave.

This chlorobenzene DNAPL carried Dioxins and DDT plus more with it and is to this day slowly dissolving into the Elmira Aquifers. This will continue for at least decades more maybe even centuries if you examine the Montrose, California subsurface chlorobenzene and DDT mixture.  

Our authorities have been dishonest and complicit. None of them can be in charge of any new cleanups!

TWO POINTS: BOTH DIOXINS & DDT DISSOLVE IN CHLOROBENZENE AND MIGRATE WITH IT BOTH WITH THE SLOWLY DISSOLVING CHLOROBENZENE PLUME AS WELL AS WITH THE BULK OF THE REMAINING DNAPL

 

So chlorobenzene is hardly the pesky, younger brother hanging around with the older, faster moving more toxic sibling (NDMA). This is partly how chlorobenzene has been falsely portrayed by Elmira polluters and their fellow travellors.  Other important points include the often repeated phrase "slowly" dissolving chlorobenzene or DNAPL.  Contrary to the inferences by Allan Deal (GHD) chlorobenzene basically does equal DNAPL even though the dissolved in groundwater chlorobenzene plume is no longer DNAPL. However every single droplet of the chlorobenzene contaminant plume came from the original chlorobenzene DNAPL discharged into the natural environment by incompetent, negligent or uncaring corporations. Furthermore the bulk of discharged DNAPL remains as DNAPL in the subsurface while only a tiny part of it over decades to centuries actually slowly dissolves into the groundwater.  This dissolution can also be slowed even more by the extent of other contaminants already dissolved in the groundwater.  Hence the term Effective Solubility refers to the actual solubility of a compound such as chlorobenzene in a mixture of groundwater plus all the other contaminants discharged by Uniroyal Chemical. This Effective Solubility is usually very much smaller than the Lab Solubility of the compound in pure water.

DDT and Dioxins are not insoluble in water. Yes they have a very low solubility but particularly in the case of Dioxins their Ontario Drinking Water Standard is more than a thousand times lower than their solubility in water. 

The issue is both the remaining subsurface DNAPLs both on and off the former Uniroyal site including chlorobenzene and others which are and will continue to slow the remediation of the aquifers as well as the accompanying Dioxin, DDT and other contaminants all mixed in.

MOST RESPONSES TO DIOXINS IN OUR DRINKING WATER AQUIFERS HAVE BEEN "NOT SURPRISED" OR "OF COURSE THEY ARE"

 

I'm surprised because I know how carefully and forcefully Uniroyal and successor corporations have repeatedly stated that dioxins and DDT are "hydrophobic" and "insoluble". The first may be true but the second is not. Dioxins have a solubility in water close to 20 ng/l  which means 20 parts per trillion. Yes that is a very low solubility but the terminology of "very low solubility" is more accurate than "insoluble".  DDT on the other hand has a low solubility which varying sources suggest is between 5 and 25 ug/l which means 5-25 parts per billion . This solubility of DDT is approximately 1,000 times greater than the solubility in water of dioxin. Of course as per yesterday's posting however, dioxin is much more toxic than both NDMA and DDT.

The reason people give for actually expecting dioxins in our drinking water aquifers is one of common sense. Everyone knows that Uniroyal Chemical produced Agent Orange for the U.S. military and that dioxins were an unintended by-product of them. Also everyone knows that Uniroyal Chemical dumped or buried hundreds of tonnes  of toxic wastes in, on and under their property in Elmira.  Obviously these same folks either don't believe the lies of the polluter that dioxins and DDT couldn't get into our drinking water aquifers or they don't care or know what the claims are. For them if you have a huge buried mess right there then of course between wind, rain and groundwater toxic things will migrate. 

It gets worse of course in regards to mobility of these truly nasty compounds. There are many more mechanisms available some of which will be shared in upcoming days. Those mechanisms are why human beings around the globe are carrying a body burden of dioxins and more. Some humans are more susceptible to damage from them than others. The list of heath effects are absolutely horrendous. Thank you very much Uniroyal for providing jobs to this community. You made large amounts of money in exchange plus you left your poisons behind.  Next time take the poisons with you and choke on them.

YES WE DO HAVE DIOXINS IN ELMIRA'S DRINKING WATER AQUIFERS

 

Maybe the thought is that the still living old timers here in Elmira have developed an immunity to toxic chemicals ? Maybe after decades of various exposures Mr. Charles Darwin (Survival of the Fittest) has already weeded out those most likely to succumb to chemical onslaughts.  Sure let's fire up the old laboratory and cook us a few more batches of polluted water for our enjoyment. Our authorities are already hinting about uses for the polluted Elmira Aquifers. What a way to solve the housing crisis and the always rising costs of food. Enough quick deaths would also reduce hospital waiting times and free up beds for the younger folk.  Lanxess, MECP and Woolwich Township likely see this as a win-win-win.

Fortunately our authorities in charge of the Elmira groundwater remediation know the first rule of both cleanups and public relations. Never, ever sample or test for parameters (chemicals) that you absolutely do not want to find. Can you imagine the panic and anger levels if Uniroyal Chemical and the Ontario Ministry of Environment had announced during the height of the Elmira water crisis that there was a more toxic chemical in our aquifers than  NDMA?  

The drinking water standard for NDMA is 9 parts per trillion (9 ppt.). That is indeed tiny because it is highly toxic. 

The drinking water standard for dioxins is 15 parts per quadrillion (15 ppq.) .  That is approximately 1,000 times more toxic than NDMA.

So Sandy and Nathan and any other Lanxess apologists on Council do your thing. Announce a public meeting and have ALL the guilty parties present to deny, deny, and deny. The MECP and Region of Waterloo would be a start.  Lanxess and all their consultants can help. 

WHAT COULD IT BE? HAS SANDY RESIGNED? HAVE LANXESS RUN BACK TO EUROPE? WHAT IS GOING ON?

 

Do they have any ethics or morals at all? Did they get written permission from either the companies or the residents along Union St. N. to permit contamination to flow off the former Uniroyal site allegedly to "optimize" the cleanup? This was done starting about twenty years ago. Actually intentionally increasing the sub surface toxic load including in the drinking water aquifers. 

How much of the off-site Dnapls (chlorobenzene & others) have actually been discovered to date? How many are Lanxess and GHD prepared to properly clean up? Originally I was aware of the dnapls at OW57-32R as well as at Nutrite with the extraordinary groundwater concentrations of substances such as Benzothiazole, Mercaptobenzothiazole, Carboxin and Aniline. Now courtesy of common sense and Arcadis (Jessie Wright) we are aware of many more just south-west of the former Uniroyal site. 

Part of the problem of course is how long it will take for the dnapls to dissolve into the groundwater. Until they are either removed or fully dissolved in decades or centuries they will remain as a long term contaminant source to the Elmira Aquifers which they are in. While local contaminants such as NDMA and chlorobenzene to date really aren't that close to drinking water standards after 27 2/3 years of remediation (pump & treat), there are others undoubtedly that are even further from their Ontario Drinking Water Standards. 

Of course we can not count on any honest information from the company, their consultants, the Ministry of Environment, Woolwich Township or the Region of Waterloo. Control Orders are for Putzes would be a good protest sign. Any new claims of miraculous cleanups via a new Control Order is likely wishful thinking.  Any denials by the guilty parties of recently discovered data and facts are most likely shameless and self-serving lying to save money and jobs.

 Remember no lie is too small and no lie is too large not to be embraced and entrained by corporate polluters.

HOW COULD DNAPL BE THE LIMITING FACTOR TO CLEAN UP THE ELMIRA AQUIFERS?

 

Since the June 19/25 TRAC meeting disclosed DNAPL located off-site just south of the company as well as on First St. and Howard St. it has become obvious that we have been lied to for decades. These only just recently disclosed DNAPL locations match the highest concentrations of chlorobenzene in the Municipal Lower Aquifer in this area. 

The other problem is the numerous chlorobenzene/DNAPL sources throughout the area around the former Varnicolor Chemical. Not just around but on both sides (east & west) as well as possibly right on site. These groundwater concentrations should have been picked up on the Varnicolor Chemical site in the shallow aquifer monitoring but allegedly were not. WHY NOT? The map shown by Mr. Wright (Arcadis) is incredible as it shows perhaps as many as nine off-site sources of chlorobenzene/DNAPL. 

Do we at last have the smoking gun proving corruption by the Ontario Ministry of Environment? The lack of chlorobenzene detections on site taken by the M.O.E. was never properly explained. The refusal and indeed reneging on the promise to citizens to sample the deeper aquifer was also never appropriately explained. 

All this off-site DNAPL needs to be properly removed or taken care of. Absolutely zero of the parties involved in the cleanup now should be involved in the future removal of DNAPL as they simply are too dishonest and untrustworthy.