Why is the US trying to dump toxic waste in my country? - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

John Henry · 11-15-2003, 07:21 AM

A fleet of so-called 'ghost ships' have arrived in the UK from the US. These ships contain toxic chemicals, including fifty tonnes of asbestos, and have been sent to Hartlepool to be dismantled and disposed of. The firm in charge of dismantling the ships, Able UK say that the toxic waste on board can be disposed of safely. If this is so, why have they not been dismantled in the US?

There is a brief article on the matter here

BigGov · 11-15-2003, 07:26 AM

Because the UK agreed to do it...

John Henry · 11-15-2003, 07:33 AM

In fact, the UK did not agree to do it. I did not agree to do it, the Environment Agency (the government body responsible for allowing or disallowing such things) did not agree to it and there is to be a legal hearing on the matter before the dismantling is allowed to go ahead. Able UK are an independent company, not a national body. They and the US Navy made this agreement, apperently without even the slightest concern for British law or popular opinion.

Shauk · 11-15-2003, 07:33 AM

"The plan was thrown into chaos last week when the High Court ordered the company not to begin breaking up the decrepit ships until the end of legal hearings next month."

sounds like the firm agreed to do it, but the government/court there says otherwise, at least till the trial is done.

that sucks, they need to dismantle that shit somewhere else. the UK is too cool to risk with abestos crap all over the place.

Arc101 · 11-15-2003, 08:19 AM

I would prefer these ships to be dismantled here in the UK as the stuff can be disposed of without causing environmental / health problems to people. The UK has sent ships to India to be disposed of, and the workers there do not wear protective clothing and are exposed to mercury, lead and arsenic. In fact one report I read said that up to 1 in 4 of these workers who earn 65p a day will die of cancer.

Arc101 · 11-15-2003, 08:24 AM

Ok just found a story about my last post:

Quote:

SCANDAL: BRITAIN SENDS TOXIC WASTE TO INDIA

Nov 15 2003
By Rosa Prince

THIS is the proof of Britain's dirty maritime secret - a fleet of rusting ghost ships spreading their poison across a beach in India.

As protest rages in this country over 13 American toxic ships due to be decommissioned in Hartlepool, an even deadlier fleet pollutes the seas thousands of miles away.

For Britain has an equally infamous record for off-loading toxic vessels in third world countries.

Last week, the Genova Bridge, a cargo ship used by the Ministry of Defence in the run-up to the Gulf War, docked in Alang, a port in Gujarat on the north west coast of India and home to the world's largest ship-breaking yard.

Because it carries toxic materials, campaigners claim the Genova Bridge's owners and the UK Government are in breach of international law by not disposing of it in this country. Built in Poland in 1980, the 18,000-ton ship was managed until now by London-based V Ships Commercial, one of the world's largest shipping operators.

Under the complicated international maritime system, the ship is owned by a Ukranian-Liberian firm but sails under a St Vincent and Grenadines flag. Ten other British ships have been dumped at Alang so far this year.

And local people, including dozens of children who play amid the ship graveyard, are left exposed to the hazardous waste on board. Cancer-causing asbestos is stripped by impoverished locals using their bare hands and left to dry in the sun before being sold.

Workers, who do not wear protective clothing, are also exposed to mercury, lead, arsenic and chromium poisoning. One in four of the 40,000 workers, on 65p a day, will die of cancer.

Despite our own shameful record, the British Government opposes the plan by Hartlepool firm Able UK to dismantle the 13 US Navy ships.

Environment Secretary Margaret Beckett said: "The proposed shipment of these vessels to Hartlepool for dismantling cannot be completed consistent with international rules."

But Greenpeace spokesman Ramapati Kumar said: "This is a classic case of double standards.

"While the UK authorities don't want US waste in their backyard they are happy to illegally dump their own elsewhere.

"They fail to ensure safe removal of toxic substances and safe conditions for the workers."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews...name_page.html

Liquor Dealer · 11-15-2003, 04:19 PM

I am guessing that an English firm contracted to dismantle the ships based upon competitive bids. It is a business arrangement - not some deep plot to spread toxic materials. Asbetos, like any other material that has been declared toxic, etc, can be disposed of without harming anything if it is done properly - it is improper disposal or the illegal dumping of such materials that causes the major agony - it this instance that quite obviously wasn't the case. Oh yeah! and by the way John Henry - I think your avatar is really neat!

nirol · 11-16-2003, 02:11 PM

Free Trade anyone?

Do you believe popular opinion should be solicited for every business contract? The UK company is not exempt from UK (and EU?) environmental laws, it would be no different if the ships had been built in Glasgow and under a UK flag.

irateplatypus · 11-17-2003, 10:26 PM

yeah, i would hardly consider asbestos to be "toxic" in the sense that it is dangerous to dispose of.

there is always a good reason why this stuff happens, and that reason is the almighty dollar (pound?). you can bet that officials on both sides of the pond knew about it, but enough palms were greased or loopholes found to make it acceptable.

sorry, i'm often cynical... can't help it.

Dilbert1234567 · 11-18-2003, 12:17 AM

because we dont want it and were bigger then you

(tipical american dumb ass)

onetime2 · 11-18-2003, 04:46 AM

Oooh scary asbestos. Asbestos is dangerous when the dust is airborne and you're breathing it in without repirators. How far do you think the airborne particles will get from the scrap yard (especially given the fact that they will be wetting it down and probably sealing the rooms being cleaned)?

jwoody · 11-18-2003, 07:37 AM

This entire protest is completely absurd. The dock in Hartlepool was designed for the sole purpose of dismantling ships and has been doing so for decades.

It is a valuable source of employment in one of the most deprived areas of the country.

I would much rather they were dismantled in my back yard by professionals than some fucking unlucky kids in India (see article posted by Arc101).

mml · 11-18-2003, 03:30 PM

Arc,jwoody and L.D. have got this thing right. The ships were taken there because Hartlepool is an appropriate location to do this demolition and an apparently legal contract between two groups was reached. If, in fact, some laws are being broken, I am sure these ships will be moved on to another facility, unfortunately, that facility might not be as good. Welcome to international business and the global village.

User Name · 11-18-2003, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by John Henry
A fleet of so-called 'ghost ships' have arrived in the UK from the US. These ships contain toxic chemicals, including fifty tonnes of asbestos, and have been sent to Hartlepool to be dismantled and disposed of. The firm in charge of dismantling the ships, Able UK say that the toxic waste on board can be disposed of safely. If this is so, why have they not been dismantled in the US?

There is a brief article on the matter here

Because the American government paid a lot of money to this firm. As you know, it pays taxes, which go to the federal and local governments, which, in theory benefit the people. This firm also provides jobs. As a private corporation, it is free to do whatever it wishes, as long as the government gave all the proper permits. If the UK government was against it, it shouldn't have given the firm the permits.

Jesus Pimp · 11-20-2003, 08:38 PM

People will do anything for money including accepting waste from another country.

supafly · 11-21-2003, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jesus Pimp
People will do anything for money including accepting waste from another country.

I agree this is probably some sort of deal between USA and England. There is always money involved.

John Henry · 12-05-2003, 12:31 PM

I absolutely agree that it's better for the stuff to be dismantled here than somewhere where the workers would be more at risk and I see the point about free trade. The point is that America is technologically at least on a par with if not further ahead than Britain. While America has a stronger economy than Britain, we have a falsely inflated economy due to lots of low interest lending. Consequently a lot of stuff over here is more expensive. Given this, it would surely be cheaper for the ships to be hauled to somewhere well kitted out in the states and have it done there, rather than drag them all the way over here to do the same job. The only conclusion I could come to is that there is some legislation which stops the ships being dismantled in the US that we don't have over here. For such legislation to exist in the first place, there would surely have to be some good reason. That's what worries me.

The title of this thread is a bit badly phrased, but I was using tabloid tactics to get people to look. Sorry. It's really not meant in UK vs US way, just in a wtf?! way.

Dwarf020 · 12-07-2003, 09:49 AM

obviously, they're doing this because it was a lot cheaper to dispose of these ships using the UK company then any US company which is also capable. it's not the US doing something evil to the UK, it's just the way the world works w/free trade.

11-15-2003, 07:21 AM	#1 (permalink)
John Henry Addict Location: Grey Britain	Why is the US trying to dump toxic waste in my country? A fleet of so-called 'ghost ships' have arrived in the UK from the US. These ships contain toxic chemicals, including fifty tonnes of asbestos, and have been sent to Hartlepool to be dismantled and disposed of. The firm in charge of dismantling the ships, Able UK say that the toxic waste on board can be disposed of safely. If this is so, why have they not been dismantled in the US? There is a brief article on the matter here __________________ "No one was behaving from very Buddhist motives. Then, thought Pigsy, he was hardly a Buddha, nor was he a monkey. Presently, he was a pig spirit changed into a little girl pretending to be a little boy to be offered to a water monster. It was all very simple to a pig spirit."

11-15-2003, 07:26 AM	#2 (permalink)
BigGov WoW or Class... Location: UWW	Because the UK agreed to do it... __________________ One day an Englishman, a Scotsman, and an Irishman walked into a pub together. They each bought a pint of Guinness. Just as they were about to enjoy their creamy beverage, three flies landed in each of their pints. The Englishman pushed his beer away in disgust. The Scotsman fished the fly out of his beer and continued drinking it, as if nothing had happened. The Irishman, too, picked the fly out of his drink but then held it out over the beer and yelled "SPIT IT OUT, SPIT IT OUT, YOU BASTARD!"

11-15-2003, 07:33 AM	#3 (permalink)
John Henry Addict Location: Grey Britain	In fact, the UK did not agree to do it. I did not agree to do it, the Environment Agency (the government body responsible for allowing or disallowing such things) did not agree to it and there is to be a legal hearing on the matter before the dismantling is allowed to go ahead. Able UK are an independent company, not a national body. They and the US Navy made this agreement, apperently without even the slightest concern for British law or popular opinion. __________________ "No one was behaving from very Buddhist motives. Then, thought Pigsy, he was hardly a Buddha, nor was he a monkey. Presently, he was a pig spirit changed into a little girl pretending to be a little boy to be offered to a water monster. It was all very simple to a pig spirit."

11-15-2003, 04:19 PM	#7 (permalink)
Liquor Dealer Super Agitator Location: Just SW of Nowhere!!! In the good old US of A	I am guessing that an English firm contracted to dismantle the ships based upon competitive bids. It is a business arrangement - not some deep plot to spread toxic materials. Asbetos, like any other material that has been declared toxic, etc, can be disposed of without harming anything if it is done properly - it is improper disposal or the illegal dumping of such materials that causes the major agony - it this instance that quite obviously wasn't the case. Oh yeah! and by the way John Henry - I think your avatar is really neat! __________________ Life isn't always a bowl of cherries, sometimes it's more like a jar of Jalapenos --- what you say or do today might burn your ass tomorrow!!!

11-16-2003, 02:11 PM	#8 (permalink)
nirol Crazy Location: South East US	Free Trade anyone? Do you believe popular opinion should be solicited for every business contract? The UK company is not exempt from UK (and EU?) environmental laws, it would be no different if the ships had been built in Glasgow and under a UK flag. __________________ 'Tis better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Samuel Johnson (1709 - 1784)

11-15-2003, 07:33 AM	#4 (permalink)
Shauk Confused Adult Location: Spokane, WA	"The plan was thrown into chaos last week when the High Court ordered the company not to begin breaking up the decrepit ships until the end of legal hearings next month." sounds like the firm agreed to do it, but the government/court there says otherwise, at least till the trial is done. that sucks, they need to dismantle that shit somewhere else. the UK is too cool to risk with abestos crap all over the place.

11-15-2003, 08:19 AM	#5 (permalink)
Arc101 Addict Location: Nottingham, England	I would prefer these ships to be dismantled here in the UK as the stuff can be disposed of without causing environmental / health problems to people. The UK has sent ships to India to be disposed of, and the workers there do not wear protective clothing and are exposed to mercury, lead and arsenic. In fact one report I read said that up to 1 in 4 of these workers who earn 65p a day will die of cancer.

11-17-2003, 10:26 PM	#9 (permalink)
irateplatypus can't help but laugh Location: dar al-harb	yeah, i would hardly consider asbestos to be "toxic" in the sense that it is dangerous to dispose of. there is always a good reason why this stuff happens, and that reason is the almighty dollar (pound?). you can bet that officials on both sides of the pond knew about it, but enough palms were greased or loopholes found to make it acceptable. sorry, i'm often cynical... can't help it. __________________ If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves. ~ Winston Churchill

11-18-2003, 12:17 AM	#10 (permalink)
Dilbert1234567 Devils Cabana Boy Location: Central Coast CA	because we dont want it and were bigger then you (tipical american dumb ass) __________________ Donate Blood! "Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

11-18-2003, 04:46 AM	#11 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	Oooh scary asbestos. Asbestos is dangerous when the dust is airborne and you're breathing it in without repirators. How far do you think the airborne particles will get from the scrap yard (especially given the fact that they will be wetting it down and probably sealing the rooms being cleaned)? __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

11-18-2003, 07:37 AM	#12 (permalink)
jwoody Shackle Me Not Location: Newcastle - England.	This entire protest is completely absurd. The dock in Hartlepool was designed for the sole purpose of dismantling ships and has been doing so for decades. It is a valuable source of employment in one of the most deprived areas of the country. I would much rather they were dismantled in my back yard by professionals than some fucking unlucky kids in India (see article posted by Arc101). __________________ .

11-18-2003, 03:30 PM	#13 (permalink)
mml Adrift Location: Wandering in the Desert of Life	Arc,jwoody and L.D. have got this thing right. The ships were taken there because Hartlepool is an appropriate location to do this demolition and an apparently legal contract between two groups was reached. If, in fact, some laws are being broken, I am sure these ships will be moved on to another facility, unfortunately, that facility might not be as good. Welcome to international business and the global village. __________________ Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -Douglas Adams

11-20-2003, 08:38 PM	#15 (permalink)
Jesus Pimp The Original JizzSmacka	People will do anything for money including accepting waste from another country. __________________ Never date anyone who doesn't make your dick hard.

12-05-2003, 12:31 PM	#17 (permalink)
John Henry Addict Location: Grey Britain	I absolutely agree that it's better for the stuff to be dismantled here than somewhere where the workers would be more at risk and I see the point about free trade. The point is that America is technologically at least on a par with if not further ahead than Britain. While America has a stronger economy than Britain, we have a falsely inflated economy due to lots of low interest lending. Consequently a lot of stuff over here is more expensive. Given this, it would surely be cheaper for the ships to be hauled to somewhere well kitted out in the states and have it done there, rather than drag them all the way over here to do the same job. The only conclusion I could come to is that there is some legislation which stops the ships being dismantled in the US that we don't have over here. For such legislation to exist in the first place, there would surely have to be some good reason. That's what worries me. The title of this thread is a bit badly phrased, but I was using tabloid tactics to get people to look. Sorry. It's really not meant in UK vs US way, just in a wtf?! way. __________________ "No one was behaving from very Buddhist motives. Then, thought Pigsy, he was hardly a Buddha, nor was he a monkey. Presently, he was a pig spirit changed into a little girl pretending to be a little boy to be offered to a water monster. It was all very simple to a pig spirit."

12-07-2003, 09:49 AM	#18 (permalink)
Dwarf020 Tilted	obviously, they're doing this because it was a lot cheaper to dispose of these ships using the UK company then any US company which is also capable. it's not the US doing something evil to the UK, it's just the way the world works w/free trade.