As a resident in Louisiana, I have watched on the horizon how the environmental problems posed by the Bayou Bonfouca Superfund site near my former residence in Slidell are unfolding. The leftover pollution has caused intensified fear about health and environmental security among the public because the American Creosote Works Factory has contaminated their air, land, and water. In this report, I review the site history, the chemicals involved, associated health hazards, in-progress remedies, and prospects, which can be used to sort out the underlying environmental issues.
The Bayou Bonfouca site, which is the size of 54 acres in Slidell, Louisiana, is known for the contamination it has been dealing with for more than a century. The problem dates back to the late 19th century when the creosote-making industry started operating in 1882 (Pelletier et al., 11). Creosote, a well-known wood preservative, did the trick during this time, which has had negative environmental consequences by mixing this substance with the encompassing eco-sphere. These incidents were due to either spills, run-offs or, in some cases, direct releases, causing soil, sediment and groundwater contamination.
The main chemical in question at the Bayou Bonfouca site is creosote, which is a blend of several individual substances, many of which are known as cancer and carcinogens and toxic to human health. Cumulative exposure to creosote is capable of causing severe health problems, which are characterized by skin irritation and cancer due to inhalation of creosote vapours. In addition, one of the consequences of the pollution of the Bayou Bonfouca was the decline of the water body and, thus, the deterioration of the livelihood of the aquatic life forms, which negatively affected the ecology of the bayou (Gordner and Pirg, 28).
Significant steps have been taken to control pollutant levels at the Bayou Bonfouca Superfund site. The clean-up process commenced in the 1990s, with the EPA being the lead agent while the federal, state and PRP actions were under the supervision and collaboration of the agency. Interventions about this included sampling and removing the sediment soil and the on-site incineration of contaminants (Hockstad, 21). Contaminant treatment using groundwater also started in 1991, and up to now, contaminated groundwater is extracted, treated and discharged to the environment together with surface water as a measure to reduce the effects of the contamination.
However, the recent five-year review in August 2016 expressed concerns that the relief would only solve the immediate need, not the long-term problem, and recommended a series of necessary actions. Steps to implement are using groundwater restrictions, correction of the groundwater plume map and EPA vapour intrusion guidance evaluation (Nagisetty et al., 24). Several of these jobs have been done or are under progress, stressing the continuous efforts in taking action on environmental concerns developed at that site.
Plans for the future include a closer watch and proper upkeep of the groundwater pump and treatment system to guarantee that actions undertaken to ensure remediation efficiency are as pertinent as possible. Collaborative efforts drawn from federal and state agencies, local municipalities, and indwelling parties shall henceforth advance the cause of preserving and promoting public health and the environment (Nagisetty et al., 29). In addition to that, community engagement and awareness campaigns are a priority when it comes to bringing up the issue of transparency and the accountability of environmental problems.
In conclusion, this site is an exemplary case of a complicated environmental problem that negatively influences public health and ecological balance. Significant improvements have already been made in remediation, yet ensuring the sustainability of this clean-up process continues to be a challenge for environmental activists. We must still be disciplined, coordinate, and represent the civilians in this contamination problem and its aftermath. My experience in Louisiana from the time I realized the effects of flooding on my community showed me that decision-maker services should be limited to mitigation and sustainable activities.
Works Cited
Pelletier, Derek, et al. “Review of remediation goals at contaminated sediment sites in the United States.” Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 15.5 (2019): pp. 1-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4162
Gordner, Jillian, And Pirg Education Fund. “Funding The Future of Superfund.” (2021). Pp. 1-184 https://doi.org/mh7q
Hockstad, Trayce. “Conditional Innocence and the Myth of Consent: The Subtle Coercion of CERCLA’s Contiguous Property Owner Protection.” Mo. L. Rev. 84 (2019): pp. 1-93. https://shorturl.at/koDZ8
Nagisetty, Raja M., et al. “Environmental health perceptions in a superfund community.” Journal of Environmental Management 261 (2020): 110151. Pp. 1-31 https://doi.org/mh7r
write