Born in Kent, Indiana in 1844 where he grew up and then joined the Union Army in May of 1864. He spent most of this time guarding railroads in Alabama and Tennessee. He was later discharged in September of 1864. At the time of his discharge, he decided to enroll at Hanover College in Hanover, Indiana. He received his B.S., Masters and M.D. all by 1871.
In the year 1882 he was offered the position of Chief Chemist for the United States Department of Agriculture. He accepted this position after being passed over for presidency at Purdue. During his time he had helped in the studying to certain preservatives used in plants and their effects. After concluding this study, he was awarded $5,000 to launch his own study on the effect of a diet consisting of plants with certain preservatives on human volunteers. This is where the term the "Poison Squad" comes into effect. The term "Poison Squad" was used for this because of the potentially "poisonous" effects that the preservatives had on their human subjects. These could have led to severe illnesses or even death and that is why the subjects were call the Poison Squad. Because of these studies, it had been brought to attention that there needed to be stricter laws on what was acceptable for human consumption.
During his time working for the government, he had gained the nickname "Father of the Pure Foods and Drugs Act" due to his support and research creating such a stir that over one million women wrote to the Whitehouse to pass the law in 1906. Post nickname and law passing, he authored two editions of "Foods and Their Adulterations", one in 1907 and the second in 1911. These books went into detail about the history, preparation and adulteration of "basic foodstuffs" for a broad audience. It helped to put things into perspective for the average person, instead of using technical jargon.
In the year 1912 he resigned from office and took over the laboratories of Good Housekeeping Magazine. While working here, he conducted studies and published work that affected the general public and was able to get the information out. He proceeded to work there for 18 years.
Dr. Wiley later passed away on June 30, 1930, which just so happened to be the 24th anniversary of the passing of the Pure Foods and Drugs Act. His body was then buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
Since his passing his legacy has lived on through the naming of military sea vessels, being acknowledge by the US Postal Service by being featured on a three cent stamp and even having his home that he built in 1893 listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 2000.
His studies paved the way and helped to explain everything that was being used and what all was really going on through agriculture preservatives and the effects that they really had on the consumers. Without him, many people, if not everyone could still be in the dark and not know the true harm or possible effects of what they may be eating.
Sources:
http://lipidlibrary.aocs.org/history/Wiley/index.htm
http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WhatWeDo/History/CentennialofFDA/HarveyW.Wiley/default.htm
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/hwwiley.htm
Sunday, March 23, 2014
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Exxon Valdez: 20 Years Later
On March 24, 1989 there was a tanker transporting over 53 million gallons of oil from Valdez, Alaska to Los Angeles, California. This tanker had gone out of its way to avoid ice on normal shipping lanes and in doing so cause it to pass over the Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska. On the reef is where the ship ran aground causing it to spill vast amounts of oil into the surrounding waters and cause mass amounts of damage to the area. Within the first six hours of the ship hitting the reef, it had spilled almost eleven million gallons of its cargo into the waters. This massive loss was caused by eight of the eleven larger storage tanks being damaged on this ship and the spreading of the oil through the ocean and along coastlines would affect over 1,300 miles of coastlines along Alaska. The cleanup of the spill was started the following month of April and continued through September for the first year and was limited to summer months for the next few years due to inclement weather (being an Alaskan coastline). (info taken from L1, L3 and L5 at bottom of post)
One of the more effective ways of cleaning up the oil while still in the water was using 3M fire booms in a "U" shape with boats attached to gather surface oil in large amounts and this would allow people to set this grouping of oil on fire. On average it was stated that the vessels could gather anywhere from 15,000-30,000 gallons of oil per load and light it up. This fire would then burn for approximately 75 minutes and reduce the aftermath to about 300 gallons of residue that could easily be collected (especially because of the much smaller scale). It was concluded that the success of these sample burns were 98% efficient and could be used in efforts to control what surface oil was left in the water. (info taken from L1 and L5 at bottom of post)
Another clean up effort that was attempted but was not as successful, so it was stopped, was the use of dispersants. These would be additives to the oceanic waters which would be chemicals that could break down the oil into finer components and either make them virtually harmless to their surroundings or make them easier for people to collect from the water in general. These tests had shown that they did not work as well with the oil and they were stopped. (info taken from L1 and L2 at bottom of post)
At the height of the cleanup process it was estimated that there were over 11,000 people, 1,400 other vessels and 85 aircrafts involved with cleanup efforts. It was also estimated that at one point there were over 100 million miles of boom used in the water to collect the surface oil. Before the BP Oil Spill, this had been the largest anyone had ever seen and potentially cause the most damage, whether it being environmental and wildlife, economic or even just socially (by giving Exxon a bad reputation). (info taken from L1 and L4 at bottom of post)
Not only were people and vessels stationed on the water, but there were also large groups or people working to cleanup the beaches and shorelines with hoses and such to spray the oil back towards the water line to make it easier for collection. The people on land didn't have to just worry about the sands and beaches either, that's where a decent amount of wildlife cleanup came into play as well. During this whole fiasco countless fish, over 250,000 seabirds and thousands of otters and seals perished because of the oil. Those were just the numbers of those who weren't able to be saved. Crews on land worked their hardest to try and maintain the ecosystem the best that they could and cleaned animals as well as the beaches to be free from oil. (info taken from L4 at bottom of post)
In years after the cleanup the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council has conducted tests to monitor wildlife and the surrounding area in their recoveries since the accident had happened back in 1989. Their most recent surveys were conducted in 2002 and the information was gather and split up into lists of Not Recovering (such as the Harbor Seal and Pacific Herring which have shown little to no regrowth in population since the incident), Recovery Unknown (meaning that there is minimal data known for species such at the Cutthroat Trout and Dolly Varden), Recovered (meaning that the species on this list have met criteria and goals set forth for recovery and they included the Bald Eagle and Pink Salmon to name a few), Recovering (meaning that the species on this list are still in the process of growing back, but are showing signs of actually making progress towards goals and the list includes Clams, Mussels and Sea Otters to name a few) and there was also a list deemed Human Uses which included things such as Commercial Fishing and Recreation/Tourism (this part of the list was included because while not being specific wildlife or anything, there was still a drastic impact on these aspects of the water and they felt needed to be monitored in recovery efforts as well). (info taken from L1 at the end of the post)
Even after all cleanup efforts and everything, Exxon was still fined around $150 million, which the court forgave $125 million due to their cleanup efforts, leaving $25 million to be dispersed between North American Wetlands Conservation Fund and the National Victims of Crime Fund. These funds are just part of their criminal settlement. Their civil settlement ended up being around $900+ million (which they had agreed to pay) but there could also be a possible extra $100 million after that at a later period of time. These funds would then be used to attempt to restore the wildlife to the area and help them to reach to set goals to restore everything to how it was. There were also Federal and State settlements totaling upwards of $1 billion and Exxon had also spent approximately $2.2 billion in cleanup efforts from 1989 until 1992. When all was said and done with court cases and cleanup efforts, Exxon went and hired their own scientists to monitor the wildlife and ecosystems around Prince William Sound, Alaska and their data had shown that the numbers on everything had improved so greatly since the clean up that everything had stabilized and returned to normal levels. (info taken from L1 from bottom of post)
Although very disastrous to the wildlife and surrounding area, a lot has been learned from this incident and preventative measures have been able to be taken for future problems (such as the BP Oil Spill) to help make them less severe. These measures can also come into effect to help prevent the spills from happening to begin with (which would be ideal). There have also been advancements in dispersants to make them more effective and also less harmful to the surrounding environment in the long run. While being very detrimental at the time, a lot was learned from this incident and with this knowledge, hopefully this can be prevented in the future (minus the BP Oil Spill of course, which was also another disaster).
L1:http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/152720/
L2: http://www.evostc.state.ak.us/
L3: http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/oil/
L4: http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1887217,00.html
L5: http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/exxon-valdez-oil-spill
One of the more effective ways of cleaning up the oil while still in the water was using 3M fire booms in a "U" shape with boats attached to gather surface oil in large amounts and this would allow people to set this grouping of oil on fire. On average it was stated that the vessels could gather anywhere from 15,000-30,000 gallons of oil per load and light it up. This fire would then burn for approximately 75 minutes and reduce the aftermath to about 300 gallons of residue that could easily be collected (especially because of the much smaller scale). It was concluded that the success of these sample burns were 98% efficient and could be used in efforts to control what surface oil was left in the water. (info taken from L1 and L5 at bottom of post)
Another clean up effort that was attempted but was not as successful, so it was stopped, was the use of dispersants. These would be additives to the oceanic waters which would be chemicals that could break down the oil into finer components and either make them virtually harmless to their surroundings or make them easier for people to collect from the water in general. These tests had shown that they did not work as well with the oil and they were stopped. (info taken from L1 and L2 at bottom of post)
At the height of the cleanup process it was estimated that there were over 11,000 people, 1,400 other vessels and 85 aircrafts involved with cleanup efforts. It was also estimated that at one point there were over 100 million miles of boom used in the water to collect the surface oil. Before the BP Oil Spill, this had been the largest anyone had ever seen and potentially cause the most damage, whether it being environmental and wildlife, economic or even just socially (by giving Exxon a bad reputation). (info taken from L1 and L4 at bottom of post)
Not only were people and vessels stationed on the water, but there were also large groups or people working to cleanup the beaches and shorelines with hoses and such to spray the oil back towards the water line to make it easier for collection. The people on land didn't have to just worry about the sands and beaches either, that's where a decent amount of wildlife cleanup came into play as well. During this whole fiasco countless fish, over 250,000 seabirds and thousands of otters and seals perished because of the oil. Those were just the numbers of those who weren't able to be saved. Crews on land worked their hardest to try and maintain the ecosystem the best that they could and cleaned animals as well as the beaches to be free from oil. (info taken from L4 at bottom of post)
In years after the cleanup the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council has conducted tests to monitor wildlife and the surrounding area in their recoveries since the accident had happened back in 1989. Their most recent surveys were conducted in 2002 and the information was gather and split up into lists of Not Recovering (such as the Harbor Seal and Pacific Herring which have shown little to no regrowth in population since the incident), Recovery Unknown (meaning that there is minimal data known for species such at the Cutthroat Trout and Dolly Varden), Recovered (meaning that the species on this list have met criteria and goals set forth for recovery and they included the Bald Eagle and Pink Salmon to name a few), Recovering (meaning that the species on this list are still in the process of growing back, but are showing signs of actually making progress towards goals and the list includes Clams, Mussels and Sea Otters to name a few) and there was also a list deemed Human Uses which included things such as Commercial Fishing and Recreation/Tourism (this part of the list was included because while not being specific wildlife or anything, there was still a drastic impact on these aspects of the water and they felt needed to be monitored in recovery efforts as well). (info taken from L1 at the end of the post)
Even after all cleanup efforts and everything, Exxon was still fined around $150 million, which the court forgave $125 million due to their cleanup efforts, leaving $25 million to be dispersed between North American Wetlands Conservation Fund and the National Victims of Crime Fund. These funds are just part of their criminal settlement. Their civil settlement ended up being around $900+ million (which they had agreed to pay) but there could also be a possible extra $100 million after that at a later period of time. These funds would then be used to attempt to restore the wildlife to the area and help them to reach to set goals to restore everything to how it was. There were also Federal and State settlements totaling upwards of $1 billion and Exxon had also spent approximately $2.2 billion in cleanup efforts from 1989 until 1992. When all was said and done with court cases and cleanup efforts, Exxon went and hired their own scientists to monitor the wildlife and ecosystems around Prince William Sound, Alaska and their data had shown that the numbers on everything had improved so greatly since the clean up that everything had stabilized and returned to normal levels. (info taken from L1 from bottom of post)
Although very disastrous to the wildlife and surrounding area, a lot has been learned from this incident and preventative measures have been able to be taken for future problems (such as the BP Oil Spill) to help make them less severe. These measures can also come into effect to help prevent the spills from happening to begin with (which would be ideal). There have also been advancements in dispersants to make them more effective and also less harmful to the surrounding environment in the long run. While being very detrimental at the time, a lot was learned from this incident and with this knowledge, hopefully this can be prevented in the future (minus the BP Oil Spill of course, which was also another disaster).
L1:http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/152720/
L2: http://www.evostc.state.ak.us/
L3: http://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov/oil/
L4: http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1887217,00.html
L5: http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/exxon-valdez-oil-spill
Sunday, March 2, 2014
Transporting Oil by Train
The question posed is "How do we transport crude oil safely by rail?" and with information provided in class and such, it didn't seem as though we did. With talks of the disasters surrounding oil spills from trains derailing and all, it seemed as though there was no good way to move oil by trains.
That being said, after researching the information online about how transportation of crude oil is affected by certain laws and restrictions, it has become apparent that my fears were for the not. According to Time Magazine the US has recently tightened up rules for transporting crude oil by trains even more than previously done by voluntary rules set forth less than a week ago. The Department of Transportation has stated that rails must test the product that will be shipped before transport and handle the product accordingly. Handling the product properly would involve using the proper cars to hold the product without possible damage/corrosion/destruction, and it would also mean maintaining proper speed levels when traveling through certain areas, ie. slower through towns and closer to populated areas while being able to increase speeds while in more open areas away from population. These rules and regulations were enacted because of the recent number of crashes and spills from 2008 and on. During these past couple years there have been at least ten incidents where trains have derailed or spilled their oils which led to major destruction from explosions or larges fires.
(http://nation.time.com/2014/02/25/u-s-tightens-rules-for-transporting-crude-oil-by-train/)
According to the Association of American Railroads, the production of crude oil will see an increase of 60% from 2008 this year (so over a six year period) from a little over 5 million barrels of oil produced per day to a little over 8.5 million barrels produced per day. With that information there need to be strict rules on how it is transported in any way. Another piece of information provided from the Association of American Railroads shows that about 99.998% of all hazardous materials moved every day reach their destination without any spilling, leakage or cause for concern. This stat should provide comfort for those who are concerned with how things are being transported and the potential hazards they may face.
(https://www.aar.org/safety/Pages/crude-by-rail-facts.aspx)
That being said, after researching the information online about how transportation of crude oil is affected by certain laws and restrictions, it has become apparent that my fears were for the not. According to Time Magazine the US has recently tightened up rules for transporting crude oil by trains even more than previously done by voluntary rules set forth less than a week ago. The Department of Transportation has stated that rails must test the product that will be shipped before transport and handle the product accordingly. Handling the product properly would involve using the proper cars to hold the product without possible damage/corrosion/destruction, and it would also mean maintaining proper speed levels when traveling through certain areas, ie. slower through towns and closer to populated areas while being able to increase speeds while in more open areas away from population. These rules and regulations were enacted because of the recent number of crashes and spills from 2008 and on. During these past couple years there have been at least ten incidents where trains have derailed or spilled their oils which led to major destruction from explosions or larges fires.
(http://nation.time.com/2014/02/25/u-s-tightens-rules-for-transporting-crude-oil-by-train/)
According to the Association of American Railroads, the production of crude oil will see an increase of 60% from 2008 this year (so over a six year period) from a little over 5 million barrels of oil produced per day to a little over 8.5 million barrels produced per day. With that information there need to be strict rules on how it is transported in any way. Another piece of information provided from the Association of American Railroads shows that about 99.998% of all hazardous materials moved every day reach their destination without any spilling, leakage or cause for concern. This stat should provide comfort for those who are concerned with how things are being transported and the potential hazards they may face.
(https://www.aar.org/safety/Pages/crude-by-rail-facts.aspx)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)