Arsenic in drinking water!

In the news article “Arsenic in Water Doesn’t Float with Riverkeeper” written by John Marks on October 20th 2009 has implied the use of the precautionary principle. Summarizing the details of the article, it refers to two organizations: (1) Duke Energy and (2) Catawba Riverkeeper Foundation. Within Lake Wylie, the company Duke Energy has permission by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to continue having coal ash ponds. The Catawba Riverkeeper Foundation disagrees and has been fighting with the department to reassess for a new permit.

The two sides of the argument have shown both the strong and weak Precautionary Principle (pp). On the Riverkeeper side, they state that the pollution from the coal ash ponds has a possibility of contaminating the ground water supply and could harm the wildlife. On the other side of the argument, Duke Energy has says that arsenic is not considered toxic due to its small amounts.

From the two sides of the argument I’d like to agree upon Riverkeeper’s side. This is because if there is a possibility that the water can cause contamination to the drinking water, the pp states that it should be removed. If small amounts of arsenic are found to be non toxic like Duke Energy states, then how is it possible to have arsenic poisoning. The poisoning is caused by either large dosage, or small amounts through a long period of time. Seeing the uncertainty of the arsenics harmfulness it should be that the coal ash ponds are removed. It is clear that if the coal ponds are removed a large energy source has been loss; this can cause a potential job loss. But with the cost of harm done to other organisms it is best to not continue the burning of coal.

Reference:

Mark, John. "Arsenic in Water Doesn't Float With Riverkeeper; Duke's Coal Ash Plants Meet EPA Requirements, but Group Wants Stricter Rules." 20 Oct. 2009. Web. 20 Oct. 2009. .

"Arsenic Poisoning." BBC news. BBC, 27 Sept. 1999. Web. 21 Oct. 2009. .