West Virgina's Chernoble?

They do fracking there too? These elements are also in the crude oil line.

I hope not, but probably we will hear more about these contaminations later.

Yeah I'm in the middle of this water outage. Media blowing it out of proportion as usual. This stuff has been around since 1908 or so. Used for years in the coal industry with no known ill effects to the people that have worked with it for decades. In this state if it had been a real problem, I can assure you it would have been pulled years ago.

While it has been an inconvenience it's not the end of the world. Trust me, back in the 50s, 60s, 70s, Charleston was know as the "Chemical City of the World" and was targeted as one of the top 10 cities in the country for a nuke strike if war ever started with the USSR.

I could tell you stories that would make your hair stand on ends of things I have personally seen that have taken place in this valley. Union Carbide, Monsanto, FMC, DuPont and dozens of other chemical plants and producers ruled this area. All providing high paying jobs by the thousands. Until the creation of the abomination known as the EPA. Only took them about a decade to close down nearly all industry in the state. Making the Kanawha Valley virtually a ghost town.

With elections coming up soon, we'll see more stupid laws and regulations that will kill more jobs in the area. Real shame.

BTW, the boiling point to distill this chemical is around 450-500 degs. F. That's the only reason why WVAW couldn't clean it. As with all chemicals or at least most, the solution for pollution is dilution.

Oh one other thing, I was raised on a farm that had three gas wells and two water wells drilled on it. All the gas wells Fracked. Never a problem with any of them. None. That was 50 yrs ago.

This too shall pass.

No.

Not even close.

This will be resolved in weeks, Chernoble went on for years.

The strange thing is nobody even knows what the hazards of this stuff really are.

Also, how many other time bombs are ticking? Containment devices are not rocket science.

It's still going on.

Of course, you're right.

My wife took her mother to Whales in 1991. They encountered sheep there with red X's on them. They were contaminated by radiation from Chernobyl. I never found out why they weren't destroyed.

They are still trying to contain the skeleton of the disaster site today.

Its spelt "Wales"....not "Whales", those are huge animals that swim in our Oceans.....

Furthermore, most countries around the world simply did not bother to even measure the levels of radioactivity on farm animals from Chernobyl, but the UK was one of the few that did.

See here for a full and accurate account of how the UK public was protected and for how long - till around 2012 :-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17472698

No. Chernobyl is still happening. The mess at Chernobyl will continue for many decades to come.

Unlike the consequences of Chernobyl, the chemical (4-Methylcyclohexane Methanol [MCHM]) spilled here does not have a half life without outside intervention. Additionally this chemical produces no obvious tracer signals that can be picked up by simple ionization equipment.

Ironically this chemical compound is patented as an air freshener. This will certainly confuse the public. "How can something in my can of air freshener be considered toxic in drinking water?"

This does not appear to be a serious threat....or one that will last very long.....The problem seems to be trying to find alternative shower locations, and yes, the much maligned, plastic bottles of drinking water....I would have already booked a room somewhere south....No shower?! what are we heathens?!

http://www.reddit.com/r/chemistry/comments/1uunyw/4methylcyclohexane_methanol/

Seem they don't know much about this compound or they're not publishing it in the MSDS. In the Chicago Tribune, they recommend only using the water to flush the toilet and fire fighting. I don't think I would want to spray this stuff on any fire, mixed with water or not.

Wow. There's a wealth of information there.

Never seen such a complete lack of useful.............................anything.

I know, pretty scary, huh? Rates right up there with Monsanto Inc. and their MSDS sheets

Here is a better source of info on the spilled chemical.

.

There is better info on the health concerns as well as other topics of concern. The following I found of particular interest.

.

'....Environmental Fate/Exposure Summary:
Methylcyclohexanol's production and use as a solvent for cellulose esters and ethers and for lacquers resins, oils, and waxes, an antioxidant for lubricants, and a blending agent for special textile soaps and detergents may result in its release to the environment through various waste streams. Methylcyclohexanol is a commercial mixture that contains isomers of 2-, 3-, and 4-methylcyclohexanol, which are expected to behave in a similar manner in the environment. If released to air, a vapor pressure of 1.2 mm Hg at 25 deg C indicates trans-2-cyclohexanol will exist solely as a vapor in the atmosphere. Vapor-phase trans-2-methylcyclohexanol will be degraded in the atmosphere by reaction with photochemically-produced hydroxyl radicals; the half-life for this reaction in air is estimated to be 1.7 days. Methylcyclohexanol does not contain chromophores that absorb at wavelengths >290 nm and therefore is not expected to be susceptible to direct photolysis by sunlight. If released to soil, trans-2-methylcyclohexanol is expected to have very high mobility based upon a Koc of 34. Volatilization from moist soil surfaces is expected to be an important fate process based upon a Henry's Law constant of 7.58X10-6 atm-cu m/mole for 2-methylcyclohexanol (mixed isomers). trans-2-Methylcyclohexanol may volatilize from dry soil surfaces based upon its vapor pressure. 4-Methylcyclohexanol degraded 94.0% during a 5-day screening test using an acclimated sewage inoculum. Therefore, biodegradation may be an important fate process. If released into water, trans-2-methylcyclohexanol is not expected to adsorb to suspended solids and sediment based upon the estimated Koc. Volatilization from water surfaces is expected to be an important fate process based upon the mixed isomers of 2-methylcyclohexanol's Henry's Law constants. Estimated volatilization half-lives for a model river and model lake are 3.5 days and 42 days, respectively. An estimated BCF of 7.4 suggests the potential for bioconcentration in aquatic organisms is low. Hydrolysis is not expected to be an important environmental fate process since this compound lacks functional groups that hydrolyze under environmental conditions. Occupational exposure to methylcyclohexanol may occur through inhalation and dermal contact with this compound at workplaces where methylcyclohexanol is produced or used. Monitoring and use data indicate that the general population may be exposed to methylcyclohexanol via ingestion of drinking water and dermal contact with consumer products containing methylcyclohexanol. (SRC)...'

That all sounds real impressive, but I don't put any weight in "Peer Review". That's like asking Congress to over see our Bill of Rights and we all were that's got us.

ADM will tell you it's corn even thou we tweaked a little bit.

'.... but I don't put any weight in "Peer Review"....'

.

Um...Okay. So what alternative system for vetting scientific papers are you suggesting?

.

....or does peer review, in your eyes, diminish the reliability of the previously non-peer-reviewed work?

.

.

I find it pretty amazing that you seem willing to trust the notoriously inconsistent and incomplete OSHA mandated MSDS over a compilation of peer reviewed data far more comprehensive than the typical MSDS. Are you just out to distrust anything that says the sky might not be falling?

You do realize that 'peer' in 'peer review' sense means 'other qualified experts in the same field'? It doesn't mean 'buddy who works in the same building that you carpool with'.

.

By suggesting that 'peers' cannot be trusted to provide professional review of scientific papers because they are too likely to show favoritism to the work because the author is in their same field, you are implying that the only way to get an honest assessment would be to show it to someone lacking training and experience in that field.

.

Remember that scientific papers are published with detailed methodologies with a primary goal of being sufficient to allow dependable replication of the path they took to the described results. No one is asking anyone to simply take their word.

'....it's corn even thou we tweaked a little bit.....'

.

Actually, if it was something that humans hadn't 'tweated' a lot, it wouldn't be corn. Corn has been thoroughly domesticated significantly altering its genome (AFAIK far greater than ADM or Monsanto, albeit with a lot more time to test the results) and yielding phenotypes that don't look like the original wild grasses at all.

.

There is nothing that you would identify as 'corn' that hasn't been 'tweaked' by man so much that it doesn't resemble its wild ancestors.

This morning on the news, they said that the "crisis" would last a few more days. I assume that means that the chemical will all be downstream.

I think they are sensationalizing this to make it sound worse than it is, but there's still no excuse for it to have happened.

It is probably due in large part to the roughly 3.5 day expected half life in a river as it is volitallized into the atmosphere. IN the atmosphere the expected half life is ~1.7 days being broken down by hydroxyl radicals.

Sounds good to me. It still shouldn't have happened.

The tanks were probably neglected, due to the relatively low toxicity of the stuff.

It seems like they must have had some kind of periodic inspections in place though...that got skipped.

I agree it shouldn't have happened; but on the other hand any ChemE who has dealt with water treatment at all could suggest the necessary fixes (facilities additions) for the water company as well as short-term actions by both the water company (and/or citizen water users) and local governments. The Charleston area (was, I believe, nick-named the Chemical Valley) and has??/had a plethora of people who could address this crisis. This whole thing just reeks of the politically-motivated media-driven (Made for TV) comedy seemingly so prevalent these days where actual scientific thought is marginalized. There are no real technical issues here. Sorry about the rant!!

"No real technical issues here".

Wait a minute.

Authorities Knew About Chemicals Stored at West Virginia Pollution ...

"Freedom Industries Inc. disclosed in February that it was storing between 100,000 and 999,999 pounds of 4-methylcyclohexane methanol, known as MCMH, which it described as having 'immediate (acute) health hazards.'

ONE MILE UPSTREAM from the water treatment plant inlets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"This was not a chemical we were familiar with," Laura Jordan, a spokeswoman for the water company, said Saturday".

There are many issues here, not the least of which is that "coal is king" here and so what if there is a potential disaster one mile upstream from the region's water supply, that apparently no one knew about except some clerk who filed the paperwork away and went to their break.

Well the hens have come home to roost. The "horse" is out of the containment basin.

The injured parties will never be compensated for their losses. They will get to stand in line for hours for 5 gallons of water and a blank stare from the government regulators who are ultimately responsible.

Think about it. No showers, no clean clothes, no restaurants, only total chaos!

I'm beginning to think that all local, state, and federal government is on the take.

Or incompetent.

....or both!!

Couldn't agree more.

ProudHillbilly, (I like your handle), but I am sorry that your part of this country has been raped. I might be in California, but I am still a "Red Neck" farm boy who dislikes the EPA and OSHA, but at the same time they have provided some protection from chemical company's that want to come in and strip the land then move on to the next.

Here in California I drive by several locations going to my gold claim that were striped mined for gold, by hydraulic mining 140 years ago and the earth is still bares scares by their actions, as it will be in your part of the country when the chemical companies pull out because they sucked the area dry of everything worth anything to them.

Be Proud of where you live, just don't let "them" kill you and your family in the mean time.

This stuff is acidic and that is what is causing the irritations in people (from published reports). Like the lakes that have been effected by acid rain they will probably end up putting mega-doses of Sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or Calcium Carbonate (Soda Ash) in to attempt to neutralize it. They are the easiest chemicals to neutralize with and not go too far and cause another problem.

W Virginia does not have a good record with this type of accident. There have been many chemical spills, especially into bodies of water, in the Charleston area. There have also been numerous large failures of dams in coal settling impoundments that have caused extensive and widespread damages including deaths. Many of their lakes, streams and rivers are polluted with acidic runoffs from the coal mines. Massey Coal, The company that had a mine explosion several years ago killing numerous miners, also had several coal sludge impoundments fail that were environmental disasters, killed several people and practically wiped out several large areas of the state.

Good Luck, Old Salt

Old Salt, you know not what you speak of.

Educate yourself before you speak of something you know nothing about.

Life long West Virginian here.

ProudHillBilly-

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, fortunately for others and I, yours is different from many others. I strongly disagree with you about your comment concerning the neutralization of acidic chemicals in bodies of fresh water and especially about further education prior to speaking of subjects which your apparently feel you are highly informed on and I know nothing about.

If you were to refer only to the Chemical Safety Boards files on incidents in WV you would perhaps have a clearer view of the terrible record of the Chemical Industry there. Some examples, and by far only a few, of many include: DuPont Chemicals, six chemical releases since 2006 including one of Phosgene which was a fatality; 2010, AL Solutions, Inc., New Cumberland, two fatalities; 2008, Bayer CropScience facility in Institute, West Virginia, fatality; 2007, Ghent, Propane explosion, 4 fatalities; 2014, Elk River, Chemical Spill; and many others not handled by the CSB. During 2012 there were 252 incidents reported to the National Response Center from WV. Having been associated with the Chemical Industry in WV for many years and having traveled to numerous locations within WV during that time I am somewhat qualified to make the statements I did previously. Come on now, how cans any state who lets a spill of a bag of LEGOs make a major traffic tie-up say that they are careful and don't spill chemicals? Also a review of state's environmental laws reveals that WV has some of the weakest among the fifty states.

The bodies of water around Charleston are so extremely polluted they make the Hudson River seem like a fish pond. Pictures of the Elk River practically make a trip up the NJ Turnpike seem like a trip through virgin lands.

There are over 110 coal slurry impoundments in WV. Almost everyone of them is a toxic lake with heavy metals such as mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium, chromium, iron, manganese, aluminum and nickel-all of which dissolve in the water-and some hydrocarbons and other organic chemicals. In 1972 a sludge impoundment failed in Buffalo Creek, WV killing 125 and leaving thousands homeless. Consol No. 9 Mine, Mountaineer Coal Company, Division of Consolidation Coal Company, Farmington, Marion County, West Virginia

The coal mines of WV have also directly contributed to the dangers of living and working there. In the last 50 years there has been: 1968, Consol No. 9 Mine, Mountaineer Coal Company, Farmington, Marion County, West Virginia, 78 fatalities of which 19 are still entombed in the sealed mine; In July 22, 1972, at the Blacksville No. 1 mine in Monongalia County, 9 fatalities; Blacksville No. 1 was the site of another disaster 20 years later, 4 fatalities; January 2, 2006, an explosion killed 12 miners at the Sago mine in Upshur County; and the at the Upper Big Branch, Montcoal Eagle Mine in Raleigh County on April 5, 2010, the worst mine disaster in 40 years, 29 men were killed. Therefore 132 miners have been killed in WV mine accidents in the past 50 years. As of April 2010, there had been 119 disasters at mines in West Virginia.

Ok, ProudHillBilly this post of yours is your third in 15 days max as a member of this blog. My suggestion to you, probably one shared by many members of CR4, is that you sit back and view what the disposition of this blog is and those who participate in it is. You stated: "you know not what you speak of. Educate yourself before you speak of something you know nothing about." I have read your comment, your substantiation of it and the postings of many others. From this I surmise that the knowledge many other members and I have about this subject far exceeds what your posting indicates. I have substantiated everything I have posted, have you? I don't know where you got your information but I got mine in a long career in the chemical industry and also working part of my way through school as a bulldozer operator in a strip mine. Also many of my recent ancestors were underground coal miners. I's taint bein feishin inda crick no mors siance I dun mov'ed up da holler not quet tous monts ego.

In your spare time, find out what the real reason why Am. Cy. left Willow Island is.

Good Luck, Old Salt

First old man to 2nd, "Why are the teenage girls here so Busty?"

2nd old man "because they swim in the chemically polluted rivers around here".

First old man "what difference does that make?"

2nd old man "like a camera film - well developed!"

Andy Germany-

Were the pollutants Silicone based?

If yes, hopefully they were of the defoamer types. Don't want any entrapped air in them.

If no, I hope they were the saline typed. Much fun watching those waves on the big oceans! Just like water balloons, you squeeze them to hold on and play with them until they burst.

Good Luck, Old Salt

the MSDS on this stuff is as light on info as I've ever seen, I still don't know what long term exposure is or if it builds up in tissue over time..good mystery

And that's what worries me! Monsanto is notorious for pulling this same kind of crap

I provided a link to exactly that type of info in comment #10.

I have a pdf of the msds on my desktop, I went through it already. I've read tons of these through the years, I just found this one to be full of innuendo, not specific on a number of things.

in any event I hope in a couple of days it has either dissipated, diluted or been flushed. when FEMA shows up in the neighborhood you have real problems

Okay, I am genuinely puzzled. Why are you so loyal to the MSDS, as compared to this reference, when MSDS is notoriously incomplete and unhelpful?

The new GHS SDS are much more informationative than the old msds formats plus manufactures can't hide behind trade secrets anymore.

...and that information for comparison is ...where, exactly?

As you know OSHA and EPA are going to the new GHS system with SDSs the training for understanding them and the new labeling requirements deadline was December 1 2013 so if you are an expert as you claim to be you should know the difference between the old and new and should not be requiring me to explain 8hrs of training in a blog. Or maybe you don't have the training and now are in direct violation of OSHA.

'...an expert as you claim to be...'

.

Mind detailing for me which particular comment of mine you have contorted, leading you to make that claim?

.

The point of my previous comment is: if the SDS are so much better, reliable, and accessible as you would have us believe, Great! Let's make use of those benefits and start reaping the rewards.....unless the new system does not (or does not yet) live up to your assertions....

Any number of you statements above gives the impresion you are an expert in this field. Meaning you have knowledge or are being paid for services rendered in that particular field. I said the new SDS will have more info than the present MSDS as stated by the regulations as of right now anyone working with chemicals from the janitor to manager is required to know and understand SDS and GHS labels by 12/01/13. SDS will not offical be required until 2015. I never stated it was better or worst than your source. Main problem with you source its in an emergency situations its to technical and clumersome to be us by the average worker. The MSDS and the new SDS make it easier and quicker to react in an emergency.

'...The MSDS and the new SDS make it easier and quicker to react in an emergency....'

.

The folly of this assertion is made obvious by the very example being discussed.

.

If the habit of questioning unsupported assertions and insisting some shred of evidence be available prior to swallowing hook-line-and-sinker is, for you, sufficient to qualification as an 'expert', then you should consider most of the people in here 'experts' in most every field.....just keep it to yourself, because no one else is going to understand what you are going on about if you decide to use common terms but intend your own private definitions to apply.

I totally agree with you. Unless your a Chemist, it would take far to long to decipher what or how you need to act upon a situation like an emergency.

Seriously?

.

What specifically do you find only decipherable by a chemist, about the sections concerning firefighting, for example?

.

Fire Fighting Procedures:
Use dry chemical, carbon dioxide, or foam extinguishers. Vapors are heavier than air and will collect in low areas. Vapors may travel long distances to ignition sources and flashback. Vapors in confined areas may explode when exposed to fire. Containers may explode in fire. Storage containers and parts of containers may rocket great distances, in many directions. If material or contaminated runoff enters waterways, notify downstream users of potentially contaminated waters. Notify local health and fire officials and pollution control agencies. From a secure, explosion-proof location, use water spray to cool exposed containers. If cooling streams are ineffective (venting sound increases in volume and pitch, tank discolors or shows any signs of deforming), withdraw immediately to a secure position ... The only respirators recommended for fire fighting are self-contained breathing apparatuses that have full facepieces and are operated in a pressure-demand or other positive-pressure mode.
[Pohanish, R.P. (ed). Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemical Carcinogens 5th Edition Volume 1: A-H,Volume 2: I-Z. William Andrew, Norwich, NY 2008, p. 1688] **PEER REVIEWED**


Toxic Combustion Products:
Poisonous gases are produced in fire.
[Pohanish, R.P. (ed). Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemical Carcinogens 5th Edition Volume 1: A-H,Volume 2: I-Z. William Andrew, Norwich, NY 2008, p. 1688] **PEER REVIEWED**


Firefighting Hazards:
On heating it emits acrid fumes.
[Lewis, R.J. Sr. (ed) Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials. 11th Edition. Wiley-Interscience, Wiley & Sons, Inc. Hoboken, NJ. 2004., p. 2418] **PEER REVIEWED**

.

.

Okay, perhaps in this non-emergency situation you can describe what exactly you find so threatening only a chemist could take a stab at interpretation....

truth is not a compromise-

Well stated and very true! It doesn't take a chemist to be a good chemical emergency response person. It takes a person knowledgeable is several fields (knowledgeable not necessarily expert) such as chemistry, physics, firefighting, Haz mat response, biological, common chemicals, personnel management, reading, communications, transportation, weather, and several other similar fields. Expert knowledge is only beneficial if it can be applied in a useful manner. Most times no in-depth knowledge is necessary and often is a distraction from other things. Sometimes typical chemists get bogged down by their inability to prioritize and hence forget the original goals. ("Sometimes it's hard to remember your goal is to drain the swamp when you are up to your ass in alligators").

An example of this would be a response person sees a large and long cylindrical tanker trailer on its side next to the highway. The ends are hemispherical shaped and there is no catwalk on the top. There is no bottom valve on the tank. The trailer is painted white. The markings on the trailer have been obliterated on both sides. There is no "dog house" on the rear of the trailer. What types of contents are in it?

Large and long cylinder with hemispherical ends- maybe MC412 high pressure tank. DOT 406 is low pressure oval used to carry gasoline and fuel oil type things, not it. DOT 407, DOT 412, compressed gas/tube trailer and dry bulk cargo trailer do not have hemispherical ends so not them. MC338 has a dog house on the rear, so not it. No bottom valve, probably MC 332. Hemispherical ends probably MC 332. All this observed from 100 yards. Take binoculars and scan trailer, markings gone on sides. Look at nose and diamond says -- -- 75, look at rear and it says 10--- ---. Diamond says 1075, the designation for L.P.G., propane, propylene, and several other gaseous flammable materials. Guide for 1075 is #115. Hazards are then fire or explosion and then health in that order. Large spill evacuation downwind of at least 800 meters (1/2 mile). Fire- isolates for a radius of 1 mile and evacuate for 1 mile radius. Couldn't get to cab of truck because it is on fire and tanker is being impinged by flames on the nose. Cab contains Bill Of Lading.

All this by a competent person will take 15-30 seconds who has the DOT Emergency Response Guide (ERG) or a smart phone. The ERG is now available as an App for the smart phone.

It could have been done faster if the MSDS was more readily available. This manual method is also faster and more adjustable to changing conditions than the best commercial computer programs available

Good Luck, Old Salt

Dj95401-

You certainly got the dirty end of the stick on that incident and subsequent treatment. Prior to the requirement for MSDS's in the late 70's there was no requirement to maintain any information on hazards except good customer relations. Most of the information was obtained from Poison Control Centers, manufacturers when someone would answer the phone, The Emergency Response Guide, The CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics or maintaining a record system yourself. Even then it was difficult to determine whether the information was correct or only what someone wanted it to be on paper.

Prior to the requirement for MSDS's we contacted suppliers and threatened them to take our purchases elsewhere if they did not provide product information materials. We had a very good development lab so they were generous with help for finished products.

A big problem with the MSDS's was the way the law was written and political events that affected the originators of the law. There was only a very loose standard as to what had to be included and no required order of information. Also many sites got away with ludicrous delays in getting theirs done. Even now with the changes required in the next year the only substantial change is the requirement to use a standard order of listing the information. This was a big problem with using the old MSDS's. Top all of that with Representative Pete Williams, one of the original co-sponsors of the original OSHA law, getting caught up in an off-shoot investigation of Watergate. You then had a bill that was a good start for information requirements but lost most of its momentum in politics hanky-panky.

The most effective way to get serious information concerning products has been through anonymous phone calls to OSHA and the local, state and federal agencies. If done repeatedly the agency will get so tired of hearing from you they will go out and see what is going on. More information on this is available at the OSHA web site: osha.gov. If the local politicians work it right they can get the company's cooperation without fear of losing a tax source. Consider doing it. At this point you have nothing to lose.

Around the time of your incident a co-worker, who had been with the same firm as you, used to tell us horror stories from his previous mid-west plant. He could always come up with more gory war stories about safety that we could even imagine.

Fortunately we now have a few agencies that are more responsible for worker safety. That doesn't say they do that job even close to good but at least the system is there.

Do you still have any long term effects of the exposure that occurred 30 years ago?

Another unfortunate thing during that era was that some companies did not correct or discipline workers for non-compliance with using the proper PPE. When companies finally got wise to it after paying fines, there were many surprised employees that disregarded warning and soon thereafter were terminated.

Good Luck, Old Salt

Hey Old Salt, I don't really know how much if any lung damage was done due to that. But as far as PPE, we had and did use PPE when knowingly we were dealing with Skydrol. As a QC inspector with an aircraft coming in with a "Braking" problem as a logbook write up, I made it a point to be there to do the initial trouble-shooting, and when I opened the hydraulic bay door, little did anyone know that the brake master cylinder was leaking. And under 3,000 psi, it had a very fine mist cloud roll out of the bay opening.

I am totally open to any, and all improvements they can do to tech. sheets, biased on safety and not self promoting ego's. Fortunately for me, "Condensed Evaporated Milk" resolved my problems, but I went thru hell in the mean time.

Very seldom is there a document produced that gives all the information available about a chemical or compound. All of these are written by some organization/person that has a somewhat biased viewpoint and wants to project their product in the best light without divulging trade secrets. For most chemicals, take the information sheets originating from several manufactures/distributors for a particular chemical and you will get a variety of answers for the same question or statement. Many of them also don't make any sense or reason to generate them. Example: http://www.avantormaterials.com/documents/MSDS/usa/English/W0600_msds_us_cov_Default.pdf or http://www.fishersci.com/ecomm/servlet/msdsproxy?productName=91801&productDescription=WATER%2C+DISTILLED%2C+ACS%2C+4+L&catNo=91801&vendorId=VN00006705&storeId=10652 Were you aware that if you get distilled water in your eye it should be flushed out with water? Water on the skin; wash it with soap and water!

Informative documents such as Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS); Safety Data Sheets (SDS); state information sheets such as New Jersey's Right to Know Hazardous Substance Fact Sheets; National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Center for Disease Control (CDC); American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH^®); individual manufacturers brochures; and many similar organizations are all different and it is up to the reader/user to sort through them to find the information they want. Seldom do even two of them agree. For the best information the reader must read many of them and decide which one is most truthful about what they need to know but be aware of what the others state.

To make matters worse these information sheets are not normally written by an "in-house" expert on either the chemical or the writing of the documents. Most often they are done by a Jr. level individual or an outside firm whose specialty is writing them. Neither one of these has a direct interest or knowledge of the chemicals, their uses and significant properties. Most often they only take a fact sheet filled out by several people and fill in a "blank sheet" with questions on it, the "fill in the blanks method".

The most effective and productive method to obtaining the correct information is to look at multiple sources of information and become informed about the material. Unfortunately there is no "perfect source" of information. The final decision to determine what is correct is up to the user, be it correct, bad or ambiguous.

Good Luck, Old Salt

Interesting to note that one sheet lists pH as "not available".

Even more perplexing to me was the fact that I could buy many household chemicals all day long at the grocery store and mishandle them any way I chose, but as soon as I walked into the workplace with one, those same chemicals became hazardous materials subject to the full restrictions and handling requirements and disposal methods imposed by the federal government. Go figure.

You house isn't subject to OSHA and the other powers at large. At least not yet

You provide an excellent description of the deficiencies of the sources like the MSDS.

.

It also described why utilizing TOXNET operated by the US National Library of Medicine to access data compiled on a particular chemical typically from peer reviewed published research is a better option.

.

I haven't seen anything that even comes close. If you haven't actually looked, take a minute to compare the page I linked for the chemical in question....and compare it to anything else reliable you can quickly locate like a MSDS.

It would seem that 'environmental scrubbing' of incoming water that is more than a water filter is what we could be designing, making and installing. And then there is air plus maybe cleaning up other utilities that cross our property lines. In the past, state and local instrumentalities supplied the utilities and we accepted them as being 'clean' and ready for use without personal intervention. Maybe those days have gone.

I was just watching on what happened at Chernobyl on You Tube (Discovery Channel), as well as another documentary about the people involved 20-25 years later (the ones living that is)

The USSR (at the time) official deaths from Chernobyl was listed as something like 74 deaths????????

And the cause was basically from greed, there's the connection, but the majority was following the communist party line. It was interesting that they also interviewed Mikhael Gorbachev, where he even said the same.