NationStates

https://apnews.com/article/crime-poland ... df3c97a467

Huge’ amounts of chemical waste were dumped into the Oder river in Poland and may have irreversibly wiped out the entire ecosystem of the river and throwing a large portion of the country in health and environmental crisis. Even if its not wiped out it will take years to recover.

The poison may be mercury but this is not confirmed. '

How could anyone be so evil and heartless to effectively destroy an entire river? It takes a special kind of evil to do something like this and I hope whoever is responsible is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. I would be inclined to charge them with genocide.

Your thoughts on this almost unfathomable tragedy and disaster?

It's all over the news where I live. Some of saying that it might be some irresponsible greedy corporation, some say it could eco-terrorists (they already start forest fires), and of course some are saying it might be Russia's doing.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:It's all over the news where I live. Some of saying that it might be some irresponsible greedy corporation, some say it could eco-terrorists (they already start forest fires), and of course some are saying it might be Russia's doing.

Whoever is responsible should be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law. I’d make an example of them and use the charge of genocide.

Poland's Eurovision entry this year suddenly came to mind.

---

Anyway:

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, whose government is under pressure for its handling of what appears to be a major environmental catastrophe, vowed that Polish authorities would hold the perpetrators to account.

“Huge amounts of chemical waste were probably dumped in the Oder River with full awareness of the risks and consequences,” he said in a video on Facebook. “We will not let this matter go. We will not rest until the guilty are severely punished.”

Probably? Probably!? No wonder Germany must be so irritated.

---

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/de ... 022-08-11/

Regional environmental protection authorities in Wroclaw said Oder water samples taken on July 28 showed an 80% probability that they contained mesitylene, a toxic substance, although this was not present in samples taken after Aug. 1.

I am not familiar with mesitylene's industrial uses.

Eco-terrorists wouldn't poison a river, unless if it could further an environmental aim which it wouldn't. Eco-terrorists would be more inclined to destroy/blow up something like an oil pipeline or refinery, because violence against such a place would directly put a stop to some carbon emissions or otherwise keep more oil products in the ground and keep it from being burned and hence contribute to climate change.

Saiwania wrote:Eco-terrorists wouldn't poison a river, unless if it could further an environmental aim which it wouldn't. Eco-terrorists would be more inclined to destroy/blow up something like an oil pipeline or refinery, because violence against such a place would directly put a stop to some carbon emissions or otherwise keep more oil products in the ground and keep it from being burned and hence contribute to climate change.

Then why do they start forest fires and kill animals?

Welp for Czech Republic (Near ostrava and the order river there) parts of Siselia, germany, pomerania and others. This is an example of why not to dump your toxic wastes and chemicals into rivers, as it also affects humans who need the water to bath or drink.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:

Saiwania wrote:Eco-terrorists wouldn't poison a river, unless if it could further an environmental aim which it wouldn't. Eco-terrorists would be more inclined to destroy/blow up something like an oil pipeline or refinery, because violence against such a place would directly put a stop to some carbon emissions or otherwise keep more oil products in the ground and keep it from being burned and hence contribute to climate change.

Then why do they start forest fires and kill animals?

They don't? Eco-terrorists target industry and infrastructure (or the people/companies that put them up) that pollute/harm the environment.

Sordhau wrote:

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:
Then why do they start forest fires and kill animals?

They don't? Eco-terrorists target industry and infrastructure (or the people/companies that put them up) that pollute/harm the environment.

Except, they do.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:

Sordhau wrote:
They don't? Eco-terrorists target industry and infrastructure (or the people/companies that put them up) that pollute/harm the environment.

Except, they do.

They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

This sounds like a job for Captain Planet.

Ifreann wrote:This sounds like a job for Captain Planet.

I wish he really existed.

Sordhau wrote:

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:
Except, they do.

They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

They literally do. They are terrorists.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:

Sordhau wrote:
They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

They literally do. They are terrorists.

Which forest fires are you talking about?

Ifreann wrote:This sounds like a job for Captain Planet.

Thanks for the earworm...

Abarri wrote:Poland's Eurovision entry this year suddenly came to mind.

---

Anyway:

Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, whose government is under pressure for its handling of what appears to be a major environmental catastrophe, vowed that Polish authorities would hold the perpetrators to account.

“Huge amounts of chemical waste were probably dumped in the Oder River with full awareness of the risks and consequences,” he said in a video on Facebook. “We will not let this matter go. We will not rest until the guilty are severely punished.”

Probably? Probably!? No wonder Germany must be so irritated.

It is possible that the person who did the dumping was not the person who actually produced the chemicals, and was not aware of how harmful it would be.

Sordhau wrote:

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:
Except, they do.

They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

There is also ecoterrorist meaning a terrorist who targets the ecosystem.

San Lumen wrote:

Ifreann wrote:This sounds like a job for Captain Planet.

I wish he really existed.

He'd be kept busy everyday and he'd perhaps get annoyed with us at needing to constantly use his magic powers to conviently undo or counter the damage we easily do to the planet in pursuing our various economic/societal aims. We'd take advantage of him until his powers were drained dry.

Most polluters unfortunately, aren't just villains who're making a mess for the hell of it; but because what we want has a hard trade off or negative outcome that goes along with the benefits. People are trying to extract wealth or do a job that has a cost to it.

People need wood to build certain houses/furniture for example, but it means in the short term that a forest will be cut down. We have a thirst for metals to add to our cities and electronics, but someone out there has to mine and refine it- which will leave us with byproducts and such to have to deal with.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:

Sordhau wrote:
They literally don't. You can't be an eco-terrorist and destroy the environment. Eco-terrorists are first and foremost environmentalists; hence the "eco-" in the name.

They literally do. They are terrorists.

Who? Which "eco-terrorists" are setting forest fires and killing animals? Please explain the rationale behind an environmentalist destroying the environment. Please explain how destroying the environment advances the environmentalist agenda.

Haganham wrote:There is also ecoterrorist meaning a terrorist who targets the ecosystem.

That is not what ecoterrorism means.

I'm not supposed to go on issues from somewhere I don't live in, but I don't think Oder River in Poland goes through the Russian border. It may be just an corporations' wrong-doing. Aslong as no one uses the river for drinking or any wells connecting to the river, it will be okay. Sorry for not doing my research. Also I'm not from America.

Kingdom of Intermaria wrote:I'm not supposed to go on issues from somewhere I don't live in, but I don't think Oder River in Poland goes through the Russian border. It may be just an corporations' wrong-doing. Aslong as no one uses the river for drinking or any wells connecting to the river, it will be okay. Sorry for not doing my research. Also I'm not from America.

Bro.

The Oder River Basin has a drainage area of 118,938 km², most of which is in Poland. The population of the basin is close to 16 million inhabitants and 50.4% of the basin is agricultural cropland.

Tourism is also a significant part of the Oder's economic value. It's a lot harder to get tourists to do things on your river when it's seen as a toxic pool of death-piss.

Frisemark wrote:

Kingdom of Intermaria wrote:I'm not supposed to go on issues from somewhere I don't live in, but I don't think Oder River in Poland goes through the Russian border. It may be just an corporations' wrong-doing. Aslong as no one uses the river for drinking or any wells connecting to the river, it will be okay. Sorry for not doing my research. Also I'm not from America.

Bro.

The Oder River Basin has a drainage area of 118,938 km², most of which is in Poland. The population of the basin is close to 16 million inhabitants and 50.4% of the basin is agricultural cropland.

Tourism is also a significant part of the Oder's economic value. It's a lot harder to get tourists to do things on your river when it's seen as a toxic pool of death-piss.

I feel like an idiot, or an American. Thanks, though, ally.

Neon Lunar Eclipse wrote:It's all over the news where I live. Some of saying that it might be some irresponsible greedy corporation, some say it could eco-terrorists (they already start forest fires), and of course some are saying it might be Russia's doing.

If you are going to make a claim like that, you are going to need to provide some evidence.

How did anyone think dumping chemical waste into a river was a really great idea?

This is definitely not a trade-off.

Washington-Columbia wrote:How did anyone think dumping chemical waste into a river was a really great idea?

This is definitely not a trade-off.

Because they're not going to pay for the consequences. That is the essence of negative externalities.

Washington-Columbia wrote:How did anyone think dumping chemical waste into a river was a really great idea?

This is definitely not a trade-off.

Illegal dumping is a mainstay of organised crime.