More nonsense about the West Fertilizer Co. explosion -- with the volume turned to 11
We know some basic facts about the explosion, and some things we don't know. The partial information-vacuum has been the perfect opportunity for some people to flex their bias-propelled ignorance to the point of being laughable. But, after the laughter subsides, some corrections are in order.
Case in point:
Good Bomb, Bad Bomb
By William Boardman
OpEdNews.com
Texas Fertilizer Plant Bomb Kills More Than Boston, But It's One of Ours
Boston's bombings have brought out all kinds of conspiracy theory and bigoted reactions, even though nobody knows anything with much certainty yet. The West Fertilizer Company explosion on April 17 resulted from an actual, American conspiracy of a very familiar sort, a conspiracy of deliberate corporate denial or deceit -- for an example, think about tobacco companies -- combined with government inaction.
Unlike an unpredictable and uncontrollable terrorist bomb, a fertilizer plant explosion is totally predictable and nearly controllable. Everyone knows fertilizers can be made into bombs. That was a fertilizer bomb that destroyed the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995. Fertilizer plants, like the one that burned in Bryan, Texas, in 2009, have been a well-known danger for almost a century.
Known danger isn't necessarily a danger attended to, as the Wall Street Journal reports:
"The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said Thursday that the West Fertilizer Co. facility that exploded Wednesday was built in 1962, before state and federal requirements for toxic emissions were established. As a result, the facility was grandfathered until state law required it to get a permit in 2004. The company didn't acquire the permit until after a 2006 investigation by the environmental agency found it in violation of the law.
"The agency said it had investigated the facility in 2002 after dust complaints and found "no nuisance conditions." A citizen complaint about odor prompted the June 2006 investigation that determined the facility was operating without authorization.
"In a follow-up site visit on September 2006, the agency noted no concerns, and issued the necessary permit on December of that year. It also conducted another site investigation on January 2007. Other than the 2002 and 2006 incidents, the state agency said it "has not received any complaints regarding this facility'."
That summary gives an indication of why Texas has a reputation for lax enforcement of what few environmental regulations it has. And if that were the whole story for West Fertilizer, it might not be so bad.
There's more later, but let's make a couple of things clear:
1) West Fertilizer Company was identified almost correctly just once in the article as a "fertilizer processing and distribution plant;" almost correct because the only functions of the facility are to mix and distribute fertilizers. The word "plant" in this context suggests "factory" which is incorrect. But, that's just semantics, so let's move on.
2) Texas is draped with incredible numbers of regulations. Dubya gave us the impression that Texas was wild and unregulated, but that is untrue. Many of Texas's environmental regulations exceed those at the national level.
3) The WSJ article implies that few regulations were in place for the facility and that none were enforced. Again, not true. The facility is regulated to an appropriate degree consistent with the dangers that West was self reporting (note the caveat).
4) The explosion that occurred was not an OSHA, EPA, or TCEQ problem. It actually falls under Homeland Security; if West had properly identified itself as a major distributor of ammonium nitrate (more than 400 lbs of the chemical on hand at one time at any time during the year), then much of this would have been avoided. Perhaps the explosion may have occurred, but the loss of life and injury likely would have been completely eliminated.
Point 4 is further illustrated later in the article:
In a more current report to the EPA, state, and local agencies in 2011, West Fertilizer said there was no risk of fire or explosion at the $4 million-a-year fertilizer processing and distribution plant. The company had filed a plan for handling the risk of its toxic materials, including 54,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia, mostly stored in two 12,000 gallon storage tanks (only one of which exploded). According to the report, reviewed by the Dallas Morning News, the company said its worst-case scenario would be a 10-minute release of ammonia gas that would kill or injure no one. The second-worst-case scenario, West Fertilizer said, would be a leaky hose, that would also cause no harm. The same report said the plant had no alarms, automatic shutoff system, firewall, or sprinkler system.
So, that is correct: West falsely reported their stores of fertilizer. By conveniently ignoring this requirement, they avoided some hefty paperwork from DHS that would have alerted the responders to the presence of the chemical.
The above errors are fairly routine in the on going discussions, and I have pointed out similar errors in other articles.
But, that's not the worst of it. Mr. Boardman save the real crazy stuff for last:
What Does Monsanto Have to Do With Any of This?
Which brings us, oddly enough to Monsanto, which is the defendant in a federal would-be class action lawsuit filed in 2007 by Texas Grain Storage, Inc, the company now known as West Fertilizer Co. Sometime around 1970, West entered into a business relationship with Monsanto that continued for decades, and the lawsuit (in which many documents remain sealed) appears to center on a 1997 contract between the two companies, under which West agreed to annual purchases of the herbicide Roundup.
In the case apparently filed in 2008, Texas-Grain-now-known-as-West has been represented by some 30 lawyers at a dozen firms. The most recent filing in the case was in 2010, when a Texas magistrate judge ruled against making the case a class action. West has appealed and the appeal is still pending.
Soon after the fertilizer plant explosion, Waco police on the scene said the cause was unknown. No cause has been officially announced yet.
Nevertheless, USA Today confidently assured the world that blowing up West Fertilizer was "not terrorism-related."
More opaquely, a Monsanto spokesman said on April 18, "The long dormant lawsuit filed by Texas Grain had nothing to do with fertilizer or the operation of the West, Texas plant."
What? This guy is insinuating that a multibillion dollar, multinational corporation blew up a small town over a little business dispute?
Yes, this is the definition of insanity.
OpEdNews defines themselves as "Progressive, Tough, Liberal". No. They're just nuts.
= new reply since forum marked as read
