What Lies Beneath Rattlechain Lagoon?

I think it appropriate at this point in the proceedings to name the two mechanical diggers of Heyrman-de-roeck that are causing rampant destruction at Rhodia’s “mere”.

Napoleon

The squat of the two, “Napoleon” is a particularly destructive beast with his handler felling trees, ripping up reed bed and scouring out banks.

“Bonaparte” on the other hand is a much more sedate creature, spending most of his time near to the houses on the South side of the site, the long arm able to scrape up the parts that  Napoleon cannot reach.

Bonaparte

By the end of last week Napoleon had wrought havoc on the unstable North embankment. Also exposed was a remainder of the old pipe that boats used to use for disposal from the adjacent canal.

According to the HPA Human health risk assessment preceding these works, “If any remedial action or significant site works are undertaken at the site in the future, a risk assessment should be undertaken to assess any potential risks to health during the works and subsequent potential hazards.” Hollow words indeed. A potential hazard is the adjacent canal and its contents, yet here we see an unstable embankment being made even more so with the pretense that this has something to do with “protecting birds”.

I do fear for the safety of Napoleon should he continue to operate on this embankment, as one slip could see him finding his Watery-loo.

This afternoon saw the devastation of the North embankment reedbed by a digger on a spud barge. The aftermath looked like a tsunami had hit rattlechain lagoon with vegetative debris scattered everywhere. In addition some of the barrels that got away when Rhodia attached them to deter birds from landing on the lagoon, but couldn’t be bothered to collect up over the last 10 years were scooped up.

There was nothing careful about this exercise,  it was just random dredging  and for all the talk of the geophysical analysis that had taken place to locate metal objects in the sediment according to ERM at the public exhibition, what a crock. One metal barrel in particular appeared to be from the Albright and Wilson era, where they used to be sunk sometimes by rifle fire or just rolled over the embankment into the water- no characterisation of what they contained. This appeared to contain packaging, some of it in bin liners- but who knows?

Decades of toxic waste containing white phosphorus were being churned up which was completely avoidable. To make matters worse, when the barge had left the scene birds returned to feed on the newly poisoned chalice.

Whilst carefully positioned operatives stood taking pictures on the East embankment, no doubt for the next PR leaflet, the spudbarge returned to the causeway path, to unload the barrelled cargo. I suppose when you’ve got to go, you’ve got to go, even if there are portocabin toilets just a few yards away. Or perhaps the driver was “using his initiative” to hose down any traces of white phosphorus that may have been on the spud barge.

Oui Monsieur?

They say Hennig Brand discovered phosphorus from urine after all.

The way it was

BEACHED PIPE AND PONTOON

Today saw the removal of “the beach area” pipe. Clearly visible during the excavation of material in this area were plumes of white phosphorus pentoxide springing up as the white phosphorus that has lain dormant probably for decades was disturbed in the soil. There is no question that this area nearest the houses is heavily contaminated with p4. The camera does not lie unlike the environmental consultant and their client produced reports.

WHITE PLUME OF PHOSPHORUS PENTOXIDE AFTER WHITE PHOSPHORUS IN SOIL DISTURBED

Not surprising really, given this Environment agency inspection report from 1999, just a few weeks before I observed the first dead swan on the lagoon, that’s after the EA had told them to “clean up” the area.

This material which would still have contained p4 was shovelled with no regard towards the water along with pieces of previously dumped hardcore and bricks within the dirt. In addition the reed bed areas were also stirred up with floating debris in attendence.

SHOVEL IT INTO THE WATER

A pair of canada geese looked on bewildered, as coots danced across the water and seagulls retreated to the North embankment. Let’s see what tomorrow brings.

With work scheduled to start on the lagoon area on January 28th, it appears to have got underway week commencing 2oth February. The arrival of several containers and machinery on site which have obviously been noted, not least by the Tipton tatters.

Plenty of excavation of the South embankment nearest the houses. Plenty of soil being tipped and moved about.

Sowing the seeds

And some curious no doubt “highly sensitive scientific monitoring equipment” “draeger tubes” etc.

I think it looks like something you could probably get for £5.99 from down Wilko, but what do I know being a thick bloke from the black country.

Weather experiment?

Gaffer tape?

Today myself and Chris went to see the public exhibition that Rhodia and their contractors for the Rattlechain work ERM were putting on at The Vaughn Trading Estate. Right from the start we have stated publicly and reiterate it here that we believe that the proposed works on the lagoon are a distraction and will fail. After leaving the event this view has not changed.

WHAT THE WORK WILL NOT ACHIEVE

The site is not being “cleaned up”. This would involve the removal off site of all contaminated material. The need for high security fencing which was never there or lacking when toxic waste was actually being deposited there, will remain.

The hazardous waste sign will remain- I.E BECAUSE THE HAZARDOUS WASTE IS STILL THERE.

WHAT IT WILL ACHIEVE FOR RHODIA

The deception that this is no longer “a risk” site. The removal of the iconic apparatus used for waste disposal- the long pipes which dispensed the toxic waste. A step nearer flogging the site off for housing and the inevitable years of tipping operations that will be prolonged, dirty and hazardous.

 FOR US THE MAIN ISSUE HAS AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE EFFECTS ON WILDFOWL- THE MAIN VICTIMS OF INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION.

The only success of this scheme will be no more dead birds. This demonstration will only be achieved by retrieving any dead birds on the lake and undertaking white phosphorus analysis on the remains as before, but will Rhodia want to undertake such analysis?

Colourful displays of the work to take place on boards were provided but it was surprising to see how little regard had been given to the wildfowl themselves whose habitat albeit “unsafe” would be made even more so by proposed dredging activities. N.B stirring up the sediment that has lain there for decades is what is being proposed- before any geotextile membrane is laid.

We did not buy the explanation to dredge the smaller lagoon, but then not cap it. We believe that this lagoon is generating phosphine gas, or has the serious potential to and both Rhodia and ERM know this. Why go to the trouble of dredging this but without then capping it?

These concerns were made clear to both Rhodia and ERM, and I  was asked to put any concerns/suggestions or questions in writing. Despite doing this I was not afforded a credible response.

We wanted as many of the wildfowl on site to be removed under license before the dredging work commenced- to limit the number that will inevitably be poisoned.

We asked that if a swan landed on the site that work stopped until it had been removed, flown off or chased off, given the increased potential for poisoning. Birds don’t wear PPE.

We asked if the dredged areas could be covered in some way, and preferably the smaller lagoon that is known to contain higher levels of white phosphorus. Additionally the areas where the material was to be dredged to, to prevent birds ingesting particles of white phosphorus. This would be a particular concern at night with birds coming into roost. As work is not going on at night they will not be disturbed from this area.

We expressed concern about the upcoming breeding season and the proposed removal of all the vegetation just prior to or during this period. We also noted

• Could you confirm in writing that Rhodia intend to retain your monitoring services for 5 years with a view to 25? NB this takes the monitoring period beyond the scope of the Sandwell site allocation delivery plan period, given that the site including the lagoon remains allocated for housing. Rhodia have stated on public record that they wish to retain the site as a water feature- but not for what length of time.  The 5 year monitoring is within the plan period- 25 years is beyond it- so will the monitoring be undertaken just until the licence has been surrendered by the EA, and can it be confirmed when Rhodia will be likely to apply for such closure of the site?
• I see no purpose in carting unknown metal objects, including chemical drums a matter of less than 50 metres whereby the contents will spill out into the water making it more contaminated, and the chemical reactions unknown or unforseen, given that no study or at least none made public has ever recovered any of these artefacts to characterise what they actually contain. Why are these materials being moved, if they pose no risk where they are then why move them to potentially create one- the reason stated for not removing the entire toxic junk offsite for disposal.? If this is an exercise concerning levelling, then why is the sediment being disturbed at all. Why are materials not being imported to level the sediment out so that there is as little disturbance to it as possible? Given that the sediment is like flour I see no firm surface being created to support the membrane. What trials have been undertaken using the polyelectrolite that you spoke of concerning this type of sediment and what is the name of the polyelectrolite being used?
• Can you provide me with some more information concerning the non white phosphorus pool in Belgium that was covered with the membrane?Location, time since capping was undertaken, nature of contaminants, a bird mortality problem here?
• Rhodia Silver Bow site where capping was undertaken- a bird mortality problem here, or an exercise to “protect” birds?
• The membrane itself seemed little more than postal sack material. These will easily fray and tear.  A swans claw would rip it quite easily. I don’t see this lasting 25 years, or even 25 weeks. Any evidence for the claimed durability of this material used for capping?
• Burying the vegetation under the membrane. How is this going to be sunk and not float about on the surface? Will this not generate methane ultimately? How do you plan to stop this? Even though methane is almost certainly being generated anyway due to the nature of material identified in the chemical arm and also the confirmed fact that British waterways used the site for there own uncharacterised dredge dumping prior to licensing.

What I got in response was that the Belgian lagoon referred to was “commercially confidential” material. That I should arrange a meeting to discuss my “misconceptions” about the proposed cap.

My answer to this was no thanks. It is quite clear that this project is a PR job to pacify local residents, who have expressed concern following the revelations of bird deaths that we alone exposed. Birds will  be killed during this exercise, we know it , they know it and the environment agency know it. So for all the professed scientific expertise going into this project what will it achieve for the wildlife?

On the subject of white phosphorus poisoning of wildfowl on rattlechain lagoon, I do not need any lessons, especially from former alumni from the University of Birmingham- Albright and Wilson’s main recruiting and spawning ground- who somehow always seem to be involved in their consultancy reports.

There are no pots of gold in Rattlechain lagoon, except fools gold

This is a website under construction. It’s important that we get it right, and that requires time and care. Please check back soon.