The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > www.not-happy-orica.com > Comments

www.not-happy-orica.com : Comments

By Jonathan J. Ariel, published 19/8/2011

How much damage has Orica's hexavalent chromium leakage caused to Newcastle?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Ah, nothing like a good old-fashioned corporate bashing.

Let's close down Orica. I'm sure the health of the workers there will be far better when they're on the dole.

As for the community, nothing will change will it? No harm done before, none after.
Posted by DavidL, Friday, 19 August 2011 9:12:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another article that relies on an absence of fact.

"We don't know whether Orica or Hunter Water has ever breached those guidelines. Sadly what we do know is how little we know."

They are very popular, because you don't actually have to provide evidence, just pile innuendo upon innuendo until you reach a satisfactorily high outrage level.

But if that what makes you happy, I guess it keeps you off the street.
Posted by Pericles, Friday, 19 August 2011 10:53:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Before anyone gets too carried away about the toxic effects of hexavalent chromium it would be interesting to see whether the operators of any type of boiler around the world have an increased incidence of cancer. Almost every boiler in existence uses sodium chromate to prevent corrosion, so its presence in the community at large should be fairly widespread.

David
Posted by VK3AUU, Friday, 19 August 2011 11:04:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles

You raise a good point, that of evidence.

By "evidence" I assume you mean whatever is used to demonstrate an assertion. Giving of evidence is the method by which things are demonstrated to be true.

That's the whole problem.

In the case of Orica, there is no independent body in place tasked with reviewing what happened and measuring what happened. If there was then independently amassed evidence could be gathered and presented.

Until there is, to get any sense of what transpired in relation to possible water contamination on 8 August, the public must rely on the two players (Orica and Hunter Water) whose interest diverges from the public interest.

Case in point: according to its 2011-2012 Water Quality Monitoring Plan, Hunter Water will check some parts of its water system for a host of chemicals (including chromium) every 6 months and check other parts of its system every 3 months.

Is this frequency good enough given the vast array of industries in HW region?
Did HW check water quality soon after last week's leak? Not so if their website is any guide. And even if they did check, wouldn't it be better if an independent agency was charged with that task?

How good is it for a business (HW) client report on possible pollution by one of its bigger customers?
Posted by Jonathan J. Ariel, Friday, 19 August 2011 3:19:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The question "How much damage has Orica's hexavalent chromium leakage caused to Newcastle?"

And without even considering the question the author bashes Orica.

While emissions are a serious matter which cannot be repeated, these histrionics are out of proportion.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Saturday, 20 August 2011 7:50:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I find it so hypocritical that this Orica bashing continues in such a vengeful manner so here are a few thoughts.
1. Orica spends an inordinate amount of money sponsoring surf clubs, athletic clubs, football & soccer clubs in Stockton, are you going to refuse future sponsorship or will you be accepting it as you have in the past gladly with both arms out?
2)Do you really believe that someone deliberately caused the spill? Accidents do happen and I challenge the writers of this vitriol to show me how they are perfect and above any criticism.
3. Yes there was problem with the reportage whether it was on Oricas side or the Governments side, this will be determined by the people holding the inquiry, OH&S, Workcover,The Local Council, and other official bodies far more qualified to determine the shortcomings. Further I believe a certain sector have got a whiff of "free money" and decided to go down the litigious pathway, shame on you. Certain Politicians have also decided to launch them selves and their party back into the spotlight using Stockton as their base, this is shameful and need to be condemned. That's it I would prefer to look at the positives and move on rather than continue this corporate bashing that is taking place from the local Newspaper, radio and certain elements of the community.
Posted by Dougster, Saturday, 20 August 2011 1:43:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy