Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

c0y0t3_sly t1_itmdbdh wrote

The title sounds surprised that the Army doesn't care. Isn't the pretty much exactly why they picked that stretch of scrub, so they could do things like this in a stretch of ground nobody gave a shit about?

I'm not saying it's okay. But it doesn't seem surprising to me

181

Aksar0 t1_itnjyzb wrote

Our rainwater has these same forever chemicals. This spot isn't special, it's worldwide. Of course pollution levels vary and areas that were used as firefighting practice tend to be higher on the spectrum. What suggestions would you offer for something the military could do to help in current day? They cannot filter the water in underground aquifers. And they most certainly cannot go back in time knowing what we know now to never have used the chemicals to begin with.

6

salamander_salad t1_ito9bv2 wrote

Rainwater does not contain PFAS/PFOS.

And we are working on remediation methods right now. The navy, for example, is working on remediation for the wells it has contaminated in Kitsap county. I'm a little surprised that the army isn't at least trying to look like it's doing more than the navy.

7

Aksar0 t1_itocjcq wrote

>Rainwater does not contain PFAS/PFOS.

Yes it does. -- Source 1, Source 2

"found across the globe, including in rainwater, snow, soil, and even human blood."

15

VGSchadenfreude t1_itol2uh wrote

Or rather, it’s not supposed to contain those chemicals.

It certainly does now…

6

salamander_salad t1_itrh6yk wrote

It does not, unless you know of a way PFAS and PFOS are being released in the atmosphere.

1