[HN Gopher] Uncontrolled chemical reactions fuel crises at LA Co...
___________________________________________________________________
Uncontrolled chemical reactions fuel crises at LA County's two
largest landfills
Author : PaulHoule
Score : 82 points
Date : 2023-12-24 18:02 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (phys.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (phys.org)
| mistrial9 wrote:
| beware of pork rolls
|
| oder complaints started the day these facilities started
| operations, make no mistake! Chemistry was the high-tech of
| eighty years ago.. no way that these mysterious chemical
| reactions are "new" to this skeptics eye
|
| there are large new sources of money coming into play and yes,
| play is the operative word
|
| The Los Angeles area waste management practices have been
| outrageous since the earliest days ! Military plus Movie biz --
| multiple scandals and huge, unkept areas.. many links available
| on request. Lastly, isn't this phys.org, the ad-ridden re-hash
| site of press releases? seasons greetings
| xvector wrote:
| I'd be interested in the links!
| ta988 wrote:
| This is more common than most think, and this will get worse as
| more and more lithium batteries are making it to the garbage.
|
| This one https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Lake_Landfill is
| near radioactive material that were illegally dumped.
|
| This is why we need a more focused and funded EPA.
|
| Neighborhoods are built on highly contaminated areas hoping
| nobody will notice. There are so many disasters just waiting to
| happening or happening silently.
|
| We need ways for citizens to own and access tools for analysis.
| So they can get more focused analysis by certified organizations.
| User23 wrote:
| It's sad that we (barely) care more about recycling soda cans
| than we do batteries. If throwing batteries in the regular
| trash is such a costly thing why on Earth don't we collect a
| deposit and offer deposit return to anyone who turns them in?
| helph67 wrote:
| In Oz there are retailers who provide battery recycling
| services... https://au.news.yahoo.com/bunnings-ikea-aldi-
| recycling-old-h...
| rubicon33 wrote:
| I've got an even better question:
|
| Given how ubiquitous and common battery usage is, why on
| earth is it SO DIFFICULT TO RECYCLE THEM?
|
| My garbage is collected once a week, green waste too,
| recycling every other week, but regular use stuff like
| batteries is NEVER picked up I have to take it somewhere.
|
| I'm sorry but if we actually cared about preventing these
| things from making it into landfills, we'd make it as easy as
| possible for people to recycle them.
| creato wrote:
| I can't see battery pickup working except as a once per
| year kind of thing. And around me, there _is_ a once per
| year electronics recycling pickup in my neighborhood.
|
| Also, "take it somewhere" isn't that bad when "somewhere"
| is home depot, which has a battery disposal bin.
| shrimp_emoji wrote:
| I would toss it in the trash. I don't want to go to Home
| Depot. Lol
|
| There are only two ways to prevent this:
|
| 1. The waste management system should put everything on a
| big conveyor belt and filter out toxic/dangerous waste so
| that the consumer doesn't have to care about special
| handling.
|
| 2. Those materials should be outlawed from being used in
| consumer tech.
| rubicon33 wrote:
| > I can't see battery pickup working except as a once per
| year kind of thing.
|
| Why not?
|
| > Also, "take it somewhere" isn't that bad when
| "somewhere" is home depot, which has a battery disposal
| bin.
|
| I think you underestimate how lazy people are. Lets not
| leave the health and safety of our landfills up to
| something as risky as human laziness.
| ethbr1 wrote:
| Agreed.
|
| If we're serious about this, mandatory bi-yearly pickup
| of hazardous material (batteries, paint, solvents, etc),
| with awareness campaigns seems reasonable.
|
| Push it down as a requirement on garbage companies and
| then monitor it through them.
| Aurornis wrote:
| > Why not?
|
| Because weekly pickup is expensive to run.
|
| In most places you pay for your weekly pickup one way or
| another. There's no way people are going to vote for or
| approve an additional weekly pickup charge for something
| they dispose of very infrequently.
|
| There are many stores with battery drop offs. If you
| really want to make a dent, put the battery recycling
| drop offs in grocery stores and put signage around it.
|
| Routine pickup would be more hassle: You'd need to figure
| out the bins, the pickup method, the scheduling, etc.
| It's really terrible for anything that isn't both large
| and steady, like your waste bin.
| mcronce wrote:
| Many places already have weekly/biweekly pickup for
| single-stream glass/plastic/paper/aluminum recycling - is
| there any fundamental reason that batteries couldn't be
| added to the stream?
| coryrc wrote:
| They leak nasty stuff. Every worker would need to be
| wearing more protective clothing and respirators.
| thephyber wrote:
| Why are employees touching leaking batteries?
|
| Just have some hardware stores keep a bucket labeled
| "recycle your batteries here" and the recycler can make
| monthly visits.
| namibj wrote:
| In Germany regular grocery stores are in walking distance
| (if your living rural, you might strongly prefer a
| bicycle, though), and last I looked, the mandatory post-
| checkout secondary-packaging-disposal/-recycling station
| includes a battery bin. Though it might only be required
| if they also sell batteries, which they (so far) still
| do.
| gosub100 wrote:
| best buy has a very liberal electronics recycling program.
| do you live near one?
| Aurornis wrote:
| Weekly pickup is only appropriate for things that need to
| be picked up weekly.
|
| Many retail stores accept lithium batteries for recycling.
| You might already be going to a store every few weeks or
| months that accepts them.
| PopAlongKid wrote:
| The waste/recycling service where I live advises that we
| can put old batteries in a ziploc baggie on top of our
| recycling bin, which is picked up weekly. The three bins we
| have (landfill, organics/compost, and recycling) are picked
| up via a truck with a grabber arm, so that the driver never
| has to leave the driver's seat.
|
| The last time I left some out, I could swear I saw the
| driver just pick up the recycle bin with the baggie of
| batteries on top and dump it in with all the rest of the
| recycling (so why put the baggie on top?). For the 2-3
| times a year I do this, it would only take about 30 seconds
| to hop out and grab the baggie by hand to store it
| separately. Maybe they sort it out at the recycling
| facility, but I've also been told that almost all our
| recycling ends up in the landfill anyway.
| coldfoundry wrote:
| It really makes me think about the increase in use of
| disposable vapes, the younger demographic that uses them, and
| how they are even labelled as "disposable" in the first
| place. I know people who go through one a day and once they
| are done, they just dispose of them in their garbage can as
| they think they can simply be disposed of. I think a reward
| system would be the only way to incentivize proper recycling
| of these sadly.
| solardev wrote:
| Is there any evidence this was battery-caused? Over 35 acres..?
|
| Seems like their explanation (high heats melting plastic pipes
| and degrading the landfills' ability to pump out gases, leading
| to runaway anaerobic decomposition) is sufficient to explain
| what happened here?
| bell-cot wrote:
| > Is there any evidence...?
|
| My bet - "No Evidence Whatever". But most people don't know
| what happens if you build a big pile of oily rags. Let alone
| about the fire hazard created if you pile up green hay.
| solardev wrote:
| True, but landfill operators do. I think the unspoken
| subtext in the article is that this was an abnormally hot
| period (possibly climate driven) that the old landfills
| just weren't designed for.
|
| Kinda like the Fukushima sea walls (which were there, just
| not high enough).
| Octokiddie wrote:
| > Hundreds of feet underground, in a long-dormant portion of
| Chiquita Canyon landfill, tons of garbage have been smoldering
| for months due to an enigmatic chemical reaction.
|
| It doesn't sound enigmatic. It sounds like anaerobic respiration:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_respiration
|
| > ... In aerobic organisms undergoing respiration, electrons are
| shuttled to an electron transport chain, and the final electron
| acceptor is oxygen. Molecular oxygen is an excellent electron
| acceptor. Anaerobes instead use less-oxidizing substances such as
| nitrate (NO3), fumarate (C4H2O24), sulfate (SO24), or elemental
| sulfur (S). These terminal electron acceptors have smaller
| reduction potentials than O2. Less energy per oxidized molecule
| is released. Therefore, anaerobic respiration is less efficient
| than aerobic.
|
| In short, heavy rainfall in the last year combined with decades
| of organic waste disposal in the landfills (think yard trimmings,
| discarded food, and other organic matter) have resulted in an
| enormous, uncontrolled underground anaerobic respiration problem
| in Southern California.
| lostlogin wrote:
| The article suggests it may be on fire.
| haltist wrote:
| The person you are responding to described fire. Think about
| it.
| mlyle wrote:
| Not really. Bacteria oxidizing things with stuff other than
| molecular oxygen isn't what most people would call fire.
| GeoAtreides wrote:
| > described fire
|
| I can just imagine my mitochondria right now pointing to
| the electron transport chain and saying "shit's on fire,
| yo"
| ethbr1 wrote:
| Believe the kids just shortened that to "electron
| transport chain is fire" nowadays.
| solardev wrote:
| Sufficient anorebic decomposition, mixed with hot and dry
| climates like LA's and a buildup of flammable gases, can
| cause spontaneous combustion:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landfill_fire?wprov=sfla1
| throwup238 wrote:
| The temperatures are approaching boiling and are melting the
| PVC embedded in the landfill for gas removal. Unless it's some
| really crazy new extremophile we've never seen before (which is
| definitely possible), it's unlikely to be biological.
| CalRecycle said they've been seeing elevated oxygen in gas
| wells in the area for years and now are seeing elevated carbon
| monoxide levels that implies something is burning.
|
| The other dump with the water intrusion has that biological
| problem, but the one that's almost burning probably isn't.
| phkahler wrote:
| >> The scorching temperatures within Chiquita Canyon Landfill
| have caused pressure to build inside the 639-acre facility and
| forced contaminated water to burst onto the surface.
|
| I found that visual both gross and hilarious - in a tragic kind
| of way. It highlights how dumb some parts our modern world are.
| To think we can _dump 7000 tons a day_ into a hole and figure
| that 'll be just fine! And that's just one landfill... I don't
| have any solutions to offer, but just wow ;-)
| mulmen wrote:
| Is that somehow dumber than thinking it will be fine to extract
| the corresponding 7000 tons of raw material?
| FredPret wrote:
| 7000 tons a day is a lot to a human, but it is just peanuts
| compared to the system it's going into.
|
| In 100 years, almost all of it will be rotten or eaten or
| otherwise recycled.
| kibwen wrote:
| In 100 years the thousands of plastic diapers that I used as
| a baby will still be carefully preserving my crap such that
| archaeologists a thousand years hence will be able to
| accurately assess the contents of baby food in the late 20th
| century. And that applies to basically everything wrapped in
| plastic, such as most every garbage bag.
| mlyle wrote:
| 100 years is off by a bit, but most plastics have a life of
| 200-2000 years in a landfill. They'll break down.
|
| It's the extremely nonreactive but probably toxic chemicals
| like PFAS which are terrifying.
| FredPret wrote:
| What other grand predictions do you have for us about the
| future of microbe evolution?
|
| Also, we're talking about a tiny quantity. A single square
| mile filled to one meter = 1600x1600 = 2.5 million tons
| assuming density of 1. That's an entire year of 7000 tons a
| day.
|
| EDIT: that was snarkier than intended, my apologies.
| gosub100 wrote:
| there is no shortage of landfill space. some how corporate
| america (waste management) got you to shill for them. this
| is why I don't recycle, if they want the stuff they can dig
| it out. brainwashing kids to recycle only bolsters their
| own profits, while taking away a revenue stream that
| poor/homeless used to enjoy.
| FredPret wrote:
| I am totally on board with the idea of recycling. But the
| reality is murky. Where does the stuff go, and does it
| get recycled?
|
| A couple of years ago, it was common practice to simply
| ship garbage to a third-world country (!) and have them
| deal with it - I'm totally 100% sure they scrupulously
| recycled every ounce.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada-
| Philippines_waste_dispu...
| gosub100 wrote:
| why do they need a second truck that guzzles about the
| same amount of diesel to transport them? I thought
| recycling was "good" for the env? at least the homeless
| people who collected them used public transport/green
| energy to transport them back to the recycler.
| userbinator wrote:
| With the exception of what left the earth and made it
| into space, everything we made will be recycled sooner or
| later, by nature or by humans.
| shrubble wrote:
| Just a note, 640 acres is 1 square mile of land; the landfill
| volume is 639 acres times whatever amount of depth it has.
| helph67 wrote:
| I foresee a Hollywood monster movie block-buster!
| superkuh wrote:
| It sounds like microbial anaerobic respiration heated things up
| and then conditions were right for a smoldering burn to
| propagate. It's a shame all that detailed historical cultural
| information will be lost to future landfill researchers. On the
| upside, the high temperatures and anaerobic conditions might
| reduce metals to their base forms as sperules which would make
| future mining for material re-use a lot easier.
| anjel wrote:
| This will become Waste Management's next reason to raise carting
| charges to residents.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-12-24 23:00 UTC)