Re: Help ! I'm confused (was Last Comment Re Electro Met Production)

[JGinniver@AOL.COM]

In a message dated 04/06/2003 22:05:45 GMT Daylight Time, NiagaraNet@AOL.COM writes:



> You should add Linde with Electromet--as they were both UCC facilities 
>
> located in Western New York. Linde supplied itself with UF. 



I'm afraid I don't have the original posting that started this discussion, and the archive with it in haven't been published yet, but I'm confused.  I think it would help if L.H. Ricciuti were to restate his/her position.  Having read all of the correspondence, but then deleted it to keep my mail box clear, my recollection was that it was put forward that Electromet was the highest producer of ore to metal during the Manhattan Project.  Firstly is this the case?  If so what evidence is there, other than the confusing extract published previously, that Electromet produced metal from ore, rather than from some intermediate step.  Secondly if we are saying that Electromet is the highest producer, why is it appropriate to add Linde (which I presume is another facility), and other materials awaiting analysis to the totals for Electromet and then say that this makes Electromet the highest producer for this time period.  I'm not trying to argue over the numbers, rather I'm seeking clarification of overall intent.  It would appear to me that L.H. Ricciuti is trying to establish that within a small geographical area (around Niagara) there was significant metal production, and even that the majority of this production was undertaken by companies owned, operated by Union Carbide.  So it would help (me at least) if this issue was restated.  If this area had facilities that processed ore into intermediate forms for further processing at Union Carbide Company facilities, then it would help if this was also identified.  It is clear to me that L.H. Ricciuti has spent a significant amount of time researching this subject (as can be seen from the extract published below) and should be able to summarise all of the MED activities undertaken in the Niagara area.




> So if you add these two (plus the possibility of the 21 tons "awaiting 
>
> analysis") you have the possible total of 91 tons at Electromet over Mallinckrodt's 
>
> 41.
>
> A three month production run does not a Manhattan Project make. I have some 
>
> AEC documents that I "serendipitously" ran across that state somewhere in the 
>
> area of 90 tons a month were sent from AEC/Linde to E-Met Union Carbide fro 
>
> conversion.
>
>
> Yes, not to beat a dead horse...but I thought this modern reconstruction was 
>
> to be accurate.
>
>
> Since you also mentioned "awaiting analysis" in your post, perhaps you may 
>
> wish to look at the "Tonawanda Office of Export Import" located within Niagara 
>
> Falls, New York. This is believed to be the entry point and assay location for 
>
> much of the Canadian ore and refined product from Port Radium, NWT, and Port 
>
> Hope, Ontario, and that was shipped to Niagara. Please see if you can find any 
>
> information on that site.
>
>
> How big and what kind of furnaces exactly were Mallinckrodt using Ms. 
>
> Westbrook--just for the record? And do you know where those furnaces are now?



The next issue is whether this work undertaken as part of the Manhattan Project in this area has contributed to heart disease in the area around Niagara.  As other have indicated, in order to establish this as a reasonable hypothesis then there has to have been some work undertaken to link the work with the disease.  What is the most likely cause that has been proposed for causing an increased occurrence of heart disease.  Was it the emissions from the facilities at the time that they operated?  Was it exposure of workers, and relatives of workers (e.g.relatives of asbestos workers also received significant exposures)?  Or was it exposure from materials disposed of into the environment around these facilities.  Is there evidence of enhanced levels of radionuclides in the environment around these facilities i.e. in the soil or groundwater?  Is there evidence of enhanced levels of radionuclides in individuals around these facilities?  Is there evidence of a downwinder effect?  Any serious scientific study undertaken to establish a relationship between the source, enhanced levels of radioactivity, and the areas where the elevated incidence of heart disease occurs.  I'm sure that if L.H. Ricciuti provides citations for such studies then many of the members of the list will be only to glad to voice their opinions on the subject.  Up until now all we have had to debate are the views of Dr Goffman on the effects of ionising radiation, and an artificial debate on whether Electromet did produce metal from ore and where it should sit in a ranking of such facilities. 


I would like to emphasise that I don't wish t dismiss out of hand any suggestion that ionising radiation may have been a factor in the increased incidence of heart disease in the Niagara area.  However what often concerns me in these cases is that, where it is thought that there is something that contributes to increased cancer incidence the focus is almost always directed firstly at radiation and radioactivity.  In this instance I think it is very interesting that L.H. Ricciuti states  "Keep in mind that Niagara was the premiere chemistry location of the time, perhaps in the entire world." and yet does not question whether the activities associated with this chemistry may have had any deleterious effect on the health of the local population.  If individuals are placed at an increased risk of cancer from man's activities they deserve to have the matter reviewed properly.  To often, in my opinion, this a thorough review is not undertaken because individuals choose to identify exposure to radiation and radioactivity as the prime cause for any such increase.


Warmest regards,

                   Julian