Enemy of the People Study Guide (Adults)Enemy of the People Study Guide (Adults)Answer: The issues are still present today because of many reasons. We do not want to change our habits, our lifestyles, or our values. "There are other considerations besides scientific ones," the Mayor Peter Stockmann argues. Political and economic self-interest become tools used to avoid environmental responsibility.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #2: How does leachate travel from waste piles to plumbing systems? How can this problem be solved? Is it still a matter of cost-benefit analysis? Are non-scientific arguments still proposed to avoid the problem?
Answer: The leachate soaks into the soil and into water-bearing strata (aquifer). If water-supply intake pipes are down-gradient from the contaminated soil, the contaminants can find their way into the plumbing systems. Solutions are still a matter of cost-benefit analysis. In the play, the Mayor originally approved the design to install the water system. The design disregarded the problem of the direction of ground-water flow. The town did not want to spend the money to re-design the intake piping. The cost could have been recouped by the stream of tourists. Components of the cost-benefit are: more piping, relocation of current piping, soil and water decontamination, bath revenues, and revenues from other tourist services.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #3: Are there examples in the audience members' community where similar groundwater pollution problems exist? Is the community solving the problems? How?
Answer: Answers will be solicited from panelists representing academia, industry, government, citizen's groups, and the general audience.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #4: Do we continually monitor our public water supplies? What contaminants are being analyzed? What does "ND (Non Detect)" mean? Does the addition of chlorine solve all the problems? Are there problems associated with additives to the water supply?
Answer: Our public water supplies are continually being monitored. The contaminants that are being analyzed are inorganic contaminants, pesticides/PCBs/herbicides, radionuclides, microbiological contaminants, and organic chemicals. Chlorine is used to kill microscopic organisms (disinfect), but there are often more effective and safer ways to do that. Non Detect (ND) means that the analytic testing equipment could not detect any amount of the contaminant less than the detection limit. It does not necessarily mean that there is no amount of the contaminant in the water. The exact concentration is unknown because it is under the detection limit. In risk assessments "ND" is considered to be half of the detection limit when used for calculation purposes. Chlorine destroys the microbes responsible for disease . The problem with additives it that there are usually side effects to them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #5: Do regulations require builders to assess sites prior to construction?
Answer: Yes. In many cases, site characterization reports are required, including remedial investigations, impact statements, and risk assessments. Remedial investigations are required for Superfund and RCRA sites to define the contamination problems. This may be followed up by development of remedial alternatives. Environmental impact statements (EIS) are formulated for many projects. It is required when the project is supported with federal funds. It examines the potential impacts on the quality of the environment. An environmental risk assessment uses site data to estimate the possible harm to human health or the environment as a result of exposure to pollutants. It provides an orderly, clearly stated, and consistent way to deal with issues when evaluating whether a hazard exists and, if it does, its extent.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #6: How do environmental regulators make decisions? Is the public involved?
Answer: Environmental regulators make decisions in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations and policies. Some standards of maximum contamination levels are relaxed by allowing the waste generator to use the best available technology (BAT) to maintain contamination levels that are below the standards. Some waste generators (the homeowners, farmers, etc.) may be exempt from regulations that apply to certain industries. In cases where any amount of a contaminant can cause harm to public health, as in the case of carcinogens, a target range of the concentration of the contaminant might be subject to debate of acceptable risks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #7: Why did the tanning wastes leak away from the location at which they were disposed? What could have prevented the transport of the contaminant?
Answer: The tanning wastes leaked away from the location from which they were disposed because the land was high and sloped down hill into the soil and groundwater. The intake plumbing pipes could have been placed higher up the hill above the tannery to prevent leaching into the soil and groundwater and seeping into the supply for the pump room. To prevent the transport of contaminants, source control or methods to reduce mobility of the contaminants should be used.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #8: How can we detect and track leaks?
Answer: We can detect and track leaks by testing the surrounding soil, the groundwater and nearby lakes and streams.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #9: How many samples did Dr. Stockmann take? Were his samples representative? Were they contaminated off-site? How are modern sampling plans developed?
Answer: Dr. Stockmann took one sample of the freshwater and one sample of the seawater. His samples were not representative. He should have taken many different samples of the soil, from the baths, from the drinking water, and from the surrounding lakes and streams. It is possible that the samples were contaminated off-site due to lack of efficient and safe transportation. Modern sampling plans are developed to achieve representative results through rigorous analysis of water, air and soil using quality assurance and quality control protocols. Duplicates, banks, and sample spikes with controlled additives are used in these protocols.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #10: What was the health risk associated with the tannery wastes? Was it necessary to close down the baths? Could the problem have been solved without economic hardship? Was the nature of the risk considered by the "environmentalist?" by the town?
Answer: The health risk from tanneries is from elevated levels of lead, cyanide, and formaldehyde found in the groundwater near them. Leukemia seems to be most common in residents in the area surrounding the tanneries. People working in the tanneries tend to develop cancer from exposure to dimethylformamide, coal tar derivatives, and other toxic chemicals used to process and dye leather. The problem may not have been solved without some economic hardship. The town "environmentalist," Dr. Stockmann, assessed the risk qualitatively and anecdotally. However, the town dismissed the risks (the Mayor could not convince himself) and were only concerned with the economic ruin they might face if the baths were closed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #11:Was there evidence of a health risk? What percentage of bathers would be affected? Is it worth the risk? How could the risk be managed or reduced?
Answer: There were a number of odd illnesses among the visitors to the baths. They had originally been thought to bring these illnesses with them but actually Dr. Stockmann stated that they actually were acquired by using the baths. There was a small percentage of the bathers affected. Stockmann did not mention the increased risk to children and the elderly. The real cost question could have been: What was the cost of a significant health risk reduction?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #12: Are people still reluctant to believe the dangers of contamination because of the economic setback it would cause? Why?
Answer: Yes, we are driven by self-interest and any setback is often negotiated around in the environmental sector. Often, environmental considerations are expensive and take time to administer and are sometimes avoided or compromised.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #13: Does the government support and play a role in cleaning up contaminated sites? How does the government try to prevent more sites like these?
Answer: Yes, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) is used for rapid containment, cleanup, or remediation of abandoned hazardous-waste sites. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) is used to prevent Superfund sites by providing a comprehensive program with "cradle to grave" recordkeeping and management of hazardous wastes for existing industries.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #14: Do think that spending money on prevention would have been more cost effective in the long run? Is this often the case today? Why?
Answer: Yes, it is more cost effective because now the town has to relocate the pipes and add to them. It would have also taken less time and would not have hurt the tourism as much if they had done it right the first time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forum Question #15: Are fraud, lies, and out-and-out crime against the people still being committed today by industry? How can this be prevented?
Answer: Yes, environmental regulations and laws are broken very frequently. Strict environmental laws and enforcement of steep fines could solve the problem. Also, incentives, like Ohio's Voluntary Action Plan, encourages responsible self-control of would-be polluters.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------