Mercury in the Air
See
our full line of Nutritional supplements
The last thing anyone has wanted to think about is mercury air pollution, but
now that the United States government has moved ahead to start control of
mercury air emissions from power plants, it is a subject getting attention
from the press. Mercury is now on center stage because the Environmental
Protection Agency unveiled a rule last week to limit mercury emissions from
U.S. power plants. On one side it is being hailed as groundbreaking, in that
it is one of the first major attempts at controlling mercury emissions.
Yet the ruling and the process leading up to its creation has been criticized
not only by environmentalists but by the Government Accountability Office
and the EPA inspector general.
In the choice between families and polluters, President Bush has left
every child behind in order to reward industry and campaign contributors.
Commissioner Bradley Campbell,
Department of Environmental Protection (NJ)
Mercury is not an ordinary air pollutant nor is it classified as such. Because
it is a neurotoxin that causes neurological problems, it is considered a
hazardous air pollutant, which gives it a different legal status. This is a
very polite way of saying that mercury is a nerve poison, which even at the
lowest concentrations imaginable causes problems for the young. We are only in
the beginning phases of becoming aware of the tremendous problem with
thousands of tons of mercury being poured into the air each year. If one gram
of mercury can pollute a 20-acre lake or kill a child, imagine what 3 billion
grams (approximate one year world output of mercury into the air) of it would
do.
A fraction of a teaspoon can render all the fish in a 20-acre lake unsafe to eat.
The world is 510 million square kilometers and 71 percent of that is ocean. One gram of mercury
poured into eighty million liters of water would be cause for concern under
federal human health standards for drinking water, enough to contaminate a
typical mid-western lake. Thus one gram pollutes a typical 20 acre lake and 20
acres equals .081 square kilometers. One ton of mercury contains 1 million
grams which would thus pollute 81,000 square kilometers of lakes. One thousand
tons would pollute 81 million square kilometers, so 7,000 tons of mercury
would pollute a lake the size of the world. The world is not a lake, so the
one gram rule does not quite work, but it offers us a good reference point.
The oceans are quite deep and the atmosphere also holds a vast capacity to
hold mercury, as does the soil. But over the last five hundred years we have
dug up and used approximately 1 million tons of mercury.[ii] That is
1,000,000,000,000 grams (a trillion) or enough to blanket each 20 acres on
earth with over 149 grams. It is these 149 grams that is responsible for
mercury levels increasing by a factor of 20 times over the last 3 centuries.
The new standard will not adequately protect Delawareans or the rest of the
country from a potent neurotoxin that EPA had determined to be a serious health
threat. [iii] Sen. Tom Carper

Quite a bit of the mercury put into the air each year is from this tonnage dug up from the
ground, from medical, industrial and municipal incinerators, but about 1,000
tons a year results from the burning of coal to generate electrical power with
an overly large share of it coming from China. Thus some have argued that even
if all U.S. power plants were shut down tomorrow Americans are still at risk
from mercury that gets carried around the globe in the upper atmospheres.
The United States
government's estimate of the health benefits of reducing mercury emissions
vastly understates the total problem because it does not take into account the
direct effect of having thousands of tons of nerve poison in the atmosphere
that people breathe. The government is not paying attention to the presence of
mercury in the water people drink or that it is getting into the soil and thus
into our dry foods. If one takes even a curious glance at the above graph we
see visually that mercury is a quickly rising tide having in a few short years
polluting the majority of our waterways. What doctors and scientists have not
seen is that this same process is being repeated on land.
From start to finish, with this rule, they have done the industry's bidding,
hidden information from the public and ignored sound science when it suits them.
[iv] Sen. Patrick Leahy (VT)
Historically, the
medical, scientific and governmental regulatory agencies have grossly
underestimated the toxicity of mercury and have allowed it into medical and
dental products without warning patients of the imminent and inherent dangers.
Somehow our most professional people got into their heads that a little bit
will not hurt anyone; thinking, mistakenly, that the dose makes the poison.
This might' be true for some substances, but it is a rule that does not work
for plutonium and it does not work for mercury. We cannot possibly imagine
industry spraying a continent with a ton of plutonium, but we allow thousands
of tons of a nerve poison like mercury to be put directly into the air. Who
needs an atomic war when we have industry and government teaming up to poison
us and our children with nerve poison pumped by the ton into the air we all
breathe.
The behavior of mercury in the atmosphere and in the aquatic
systems and its effects on human health are of great concern to EPA.[v]
Recently researchers from the Northeastern Ecosystem Research Cooperative[vi] have, for the first
time, documented elevated mercury levels in non-aquatic and non-fish-eating
animals, including songbirds that live in mountaintop forests of the
northeastern part of the United States. "Mercury's reach in our environment is
much greater than we ever imagined," said Felice Stadler of the National
Wildlife Federation. The most troubling discovery to researchers was the
mercury found in the blood of songbirds. The songbird data show that
methylmercury is also forming in drier, forested areas, raising new questions
about the extent of environmental damage. The birds exhibited the following
problems from non-aquatic environmental exposure to mercury:
Fewer eggs produced, lower reproductive success, offspring less responsive to maternal calls,
reduced chick survival, and decreased egg volume, compromised embryonic
development, less likely to hunt, seek shade, less time flying, walking or
pecking. Exaggerated response to fright stimulus. Brain lesions, spinal cord
degeneration, central nervous system dysfunction, tremors, difficulty flying,
walking and standing. Inability to coordinate muscle movement, reduced
feeding, weight loss and progressive weakness in wings and legs.
It takes no stretch of the imagination to understand that what is happening to these songbirds is
happening to our children. It seems that mercury is getting into everything
and even birds and land animals like us are being blanketed with this nerve
poison. The same study found similar problems in Mink and Otters, showing us
what is on the way for human beings and their offspring.
There are giant commercial interests that serve the basic needs of modern civilization and
they are driving worldwide expansion of coal-burning power stations. The coal
industry is planning new plants in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Arizona and New
MexicoNevada. Under the Bush plan, many of these plants are likely to buy
credits from other plants, meaning that though national emissions might
decrease by an estimated 21 percent in five years, local emissions of mercury
would increase in several states. For years health advocates have pressured
the EPA to set across-the-board pollution controls that, in the view of some
scientists, would reduce mercury emissions 90 percent nationwide within three
years. Instead, the administration chose a greatly reduced plan that will
allow many tons more into the atmosphere. And at one million grams per ton,
each ton is significant.
The EPA has not quantified the cardiac costs of mercury air emissions.[vii]
Though mercury has always been part of the natural habitat, carbon-based beings were never meant
to thrive in places of high mercury concentrations. We certainly were never
meant to have it injected into our bodies nor planted inches from our brains
in our teeth. Though there is an avalanche of science pointing to the
terrible biological nature of mercury as a nerve poison, we will always find
organizations and people who defend the use of mercury and deny the great
danger it holds for the human race. The Republican staff of the House
Resources Committee thinks public health groups are "crying wolf," asserting
that they are over-blowing the dangers of mercury.[viii] Part of the reason
they think this way is that they assume incorrectly that, "All experts agree
that the primary means of mercury exposure is through eating fish."
This could not be further from the truth but believing that there is no good
scientific proof that fish cause harm, that mercury levels in fish are in
slight decline, that there is no connection between mercury in the air and in
fish, that mercury pollution in the United States is in decline, and that the
United States contributes so little to the total global emissions rate, they
believe there is no need to control mercury emissions in a more restrictive
sense.
It is true that much of the mercury exposure of the United States population is out of reach of any
federal regulation. Much airborne mercury deposited in the United States
originates from abroad and this highlights the entire question about mercury.
It's everywhere, coming from everywhere, and must be stopped on an
international level. Nothing demonstrates our current state of globalization
better than the international nature of mercury air pollution. From 1990 to
1999, even as total airborne emissions of mercury in the United States dropped
from 209.6 tons to 113.2 tons, worldwide emissions have soared literally into
the stratosphere. The United Nations is completely asleep at the helm or are
simply ignoring the problem for political reasons. The UN is missing out on
the true threat to humanity making a mockery of its mission to serve and
protect humanity. Mercury thus must be controlled in all countries
simultaneously and the UN should be out front championing this cause.
The terrible news offered by Dr. Palmer from the University of Texas and the Harvard Research
team is that the mercury in the air is having its direct effect on all of us.
No longer is it just the fish, the vaccines or the dental amalgam that are
saturating our bodies with mercury. Americans are going to have to wake up to
the fact that mercury is in the air they breathe, in the soil they plant in,
and in the water they drink, and getting rid of these sources will be
infinitely more difficult than removing thimerosal from childhood vaccines.
We have the technology and the money to dramatically cut mercury emissions starting now.
We have reached a saturation point and autism (mercury poisoning) and the avalanche of other
neurological disorders is mirroring this. We can assume that people at the
CDC are concerned about mercury in the air and what it is doing to the health
of the nation, but we cannot rely on them to protect us from anything other
than infectious diseases. The medical establishment just cannot deal with the
fact the most of the diseases we see exploding today are caused by chemical
poisoning with the principle toxic agent being mercury.
The people who survive into the next century will wonder at how their ancestors allowed their
civilization to destroy itself en masse with mercury and an endless list of
other chemicals that make mercury more toxic. Both young and old are bending
under the influence of mercury whose increasing concentration threatens
humanity. These are not alarmist words. We are at war with ourselves
chemically, and certain very rich and powerful people are laughing as they
make fortunes out of our collective misfortune. Mercury is a dramatically
rising tide that is destined to rise higher and higher until mankind wakes up,
but by then it will probably be too late.
[i] Mt. Olive Chronicle. March 23,2005
Some data on the scale of mercury production in tons. Years For the whole period. Average yearly production
[ii]
| Some data on the scale of mercury production in tons. |
| Years |
For the whole period |
Average yearly production |
| 1500-1600 |
8,981 |
90 |
| 1601-1700 |
58,532 |
585 |
| 1701-1800 |
81,957 |
820 |
| 1801-1900 |
308,085 |
3,080 |
| 1901-1946 |
193,000 |
4,200 |
| 1947-1967 |
147,981 |
7,399 |
[iii] Cape Gazette March 23, 2005
http://www.capegazette.com/storiescurrent/0305/epamercury031805.html
[iv] http://www.usnewswire.com/
3/23/2005
[v] EPA. 3/25/05 Jeff Homestead. Assistant administrator of the EPA's office of air and radiation.
http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/0305/25edequal.html
[vi] Mercury Connections is a summary of the major findings reported in a series
of 21 papers. These papers are published in: Biogeographical patterns
of environmental mercury in northeastern North America. 2005. Ecotoxicology.
Volume 14, numbers 1 and 2. This project was undertaken as part of The
Northeastern Ecosystem Research Cooperative (NERC). NERC is an initiative
to promote collaboration among ecosystem research scientists in the
northeastern U.S and eastern Canada. http://www.briloon.org/mercury/BRIMercury.pdf
[vii] EPA scientist William Farland, who is the agency's deputy assistant administrator
for science in research and development, said the EPA had not quantified the
cardiac costs of mercury because "the science is just not strong enough at this
point." Washington Post article 3/23/05
[viii] Mercury in Perspective. House Resource Committee
http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/Press/reports/mercury_in_perspective.pdf
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14203115&BRD=1918&PAG=461&dept_id=506840&rfi=6
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20050314-052518-7615r.htm
|