Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 105280	2009-11-25 19:20:00	The Filthiest River on the Planet	pctek (84)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
833652	2009-11-27 09:10:00	And a stream leads to.....?	qazwsxokmijn (102)
833653	2009-11-27 10:48:00	And a stream leads to.....? ...a river, which is why you don't need to count them. They end up being counted by the quality of the river that they tribute to. Nit picker.	Thebananamonkey (7741)
833654	2009-11-27 11:29:00	But if the stream happens to be the source of pollution, do we ignore that?	qazwsxokmijn (102)
833655	2009-11-27 15:20:00	Its time the polluter pays. If your business generates pollution as a byproduct of generating income. Simple - the cost of cleaning up the pollution becomes an additional overhead for the business, no matter what the business is. Why should the public and the taxpayer suffer when the polluter reaps the benefit?	KenESmith (6287)
833656	2009-11-27 16:34:00	Its time the polluter pays. If your business generates pollution as a byproduct of generating income. Simple - the cost of cleaning up the pollution becomes an additional overhead for the business, no matter what the business is. Why should the public and the taxpayer suffer when the polluter reaps the benefit? x2 The business (of farm) should bear the cost of fixing their pollution and then add it to the price of their goods. So then it is up to the consumer if they want to pay. Two other points I think the original report said it was rivers in Western countries - so that rules out the Ganges and all those toxic rivers in China. And it is not a good look for our so called "Clean Green" image.	Digby (677)
833657	2009-11-27 19:36:00	A small stream is just that... a small stream. This review was of rivers. And +1 for Digby... It's about a river. Not immigration. Get off of your soapbox and start taking your pills again. If you want to rant then start a thread to that effect. The #1 problem in these rivers is agriculture, specifically dairy farming. We're one of the top farming nations in the world and we have to take the good with the bad with the awful. Still, it doesn't help Palmerston North dumping millions of meters of raw effluent into the river... The two worst examples of polluted waterways I have seen in NZ would be the Waiwhetu stream, and a nauseously close competetitor, the Tarawera River just downstream of the two mills in Kawerau. Neither would have any significant contribution from dairying. It is a long time since I have viewed either, but the memory of regularly flying across Kawerau and seeing a waterway change from clear to black in less than a couple of hundred metres is still potent. NOTHING lived in the Tarawera river from that point. The "water" in the Waiwhetu stream couldn't even be used for firefighting due to it's occasional inflammable qualities. Quite possibly the liquid from either could have been used for timber preservation or as shark repellent. By one measure the Waiwhetu stream had lesser pollution as vegetation grew in and near it spasmodically. If Palmerston North is indeed "dumping millions of meters of raw effluent into the river" the citizens must be punching above their weight. Perhaps the thought of the river quality gives them the runs? ;)	R2x1 (4628)
833658	2009-11-27 20:35:00	[QUOTE=Thebananamonkey;843668] And +1 for Digby... It's about a river. Not immigration. Get off of your soapbox and start taking your pills again. If you want to rant then start a thread to that effect. I agree its disgraceful the way some people can can go off topic on a thread.	prefect (6291)
833659	2009-11-27 20:39:00	The two worst examples of polluted waterways I have seen in NZ would be the Waiwhetu stream, and a nauseously close competetitor, the Tarawera River just downstream of the two mills in Kawerau. Neither would have any significant contribution from dairying. It is a long time since I have viewed either, but the memory of regularly flying across Kawerau and seeing a waterway change from clear to black in less than a couple of hundred metres is still potent. NOTHING lived in the Tarawera river from that point. The "water" in the Waiwhetu stream couldn't even be used for firefighting due to it's occasional inflammable qualities. Quite possibly the liquid from either could have been used for timber preservation or as shark repellent. By one measure the Waiwhetu stream had lesser pollution as vegetation grew in and near it spasmodically. If Palmerston North is indeed "dumping millions of meters of raw effluent into the river" the citizens must be punching above their weight. Perhaps the thought of the river quality gives them the runs? ;) Was the black tannin? like rivers in South America and in NZ before Mr Stihl came here the rivers ran dark after heavy rain. How is the Tarawera river today could you swim and drink it other than being cold.	prefect (6291)
1 2 3 4 5