Fireworks likely caused water contamination at Mount Rushmore (2016) | Hacker News Reader

Fireworks likely caused water contamination at Mount Rushmore (2016)

usgs.gov

130 pointsjohntfella46 comments

From another study:

"Perchlorate is an oxidizer used in fireworks. Though fireworks displays are held over Lake Biwa, which supplies water to Kyoto, the city’s water treatment process lacks the ability to remove perchlorate. This study investigated perchlorate contamination in source and tap water resulting from a fireworks display. During 2016, the perchlorate concentration in the source water increased to 22.3 μg/L during the 19 hours following the display and then decreased to ,0.5 μg/L during the 43 hours following the display. The perchlorate concentration in the tap water increased to 13.6 μg/L during the 35 hours following the display, and then gradually decreased... it took 11–29 days to decrease its concentration in tap water in Kyoto to <0.5 μg/L."

Flow behavior of perchlorate from a source lake to a water supply tap following fireworks displays https://iwaponline.com/wpt/article/14/3/695/69039/Flow-behav...

In case anyone else was wondering why this matters, perchlorate interferes with thyroid hormones and can affect brain development in children. Proposed regulation sets the limit in water to either 18, or 90 micrograms per liter.

Source: https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/perchlorate-drinking-water-frequent...

A maximum perchlorate concentration of 54 micrograms per liter (µg/L) measured in a stream sample, and 38 µg/L measured from a groundwater well.

I love everything about fireworks. The explosions, the noises, the colors, the risk, the lighting-shit-on-fire...

But I recently moved to a high desert/ski town where fireworks are largely banned, and outright dangerous to the entire city for about half the year, and I'm willing to accept this tradeoff for access to forests, mountains and streams.

The local city launches the annual displays from the tallest butte in town, and there are neighborhood pools on which side of the butte will catch fire every year. The local FD uses that inevitable fire as a suppression exercise, which is nearly as entertaining as the fireworks display.

I'm perhaps jaded though, in being willing to make this tradeoff. I worked for a few years in the downtown Austin office of a major tech co. right on the river. We'd congregate in the cafeteria and in the rooftop garden for eye-level firework viewing. It was absolutely glorious.

Side anecdote: on NYE you could walk the garden perimeter and see fireworks at the horizon line in every direction. God Bless Texas.

The probable cause, of one particular case, inside of a national park, directly underneath where fireworks were displayed. If only the full title of the article managed to convey all of this. :|

The full title of the article is literally "Fireworks Likely Caused Water Contamination at Mount Rushmore".

Title on HN was editorialized.

I have a bunch of those air purifiers that auto-adjust their fan speed when they detects poor quality air + I live in a place with very permissive laws around fireworks... and the purifier under my kitchen window was going crazy last night.

You'd hear a big pop over the roof, five seconds pass, and then the purifier would kick up a notch for the next minute or so. Repeat until the neighbors' firework stash ran out.

I wish cars had this to turn on recirc when passing by a sewage plant or otherwise high pollution levels. Cars could make great mass pollution scanners, but I doubt anyone but an all-electric firm would even think of implementing this.

Perchlorate can interfere with iodine uptake by the thyroid gland. It is used as a drug to combat hyperthyroidism. It also occurs naturally and is continually produced in the atmosphere. There is no maximum contaminate level goal (MCLG) set and thus no maximum level set for groundwater.

They did setup some interim guidance back in 2008, and advised 15ppb. Overall, doesn't look super dangerous.

I honestly believe we should ban fireworks and firework shows across the country. Not only are they (apparently) bad for the environment and likely to cause wildfires*, have the potential to trigger PTSD**, but they also make the large majority of dogs terrified for at least two nights of the year. As humans, our symbiotic relationship with dogs is one of our greatest assets -- we owe them better than this. Drone shows + music are just as cool.

* https://www.readyforwildfire.org/more/fireworks-safety/

* https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/fireworks-spark-dozens-o...

* https://www.nfpa.org/education-and-research/home-fire-safety...

** https://www.ptsd.va.gov/understand/what/fireworks_ptsd.asp

** https://www.va.gov/hines-health-care/stories/how-your-firewo...

The dogs argument is the weakest argument.

What's funny to me is that people will get upset about dogs and fireworks, but are just fine with outdoor cats killing literally billions of native animals a year.

Oh don't get me started on outdoor cats...

Strong disagree, but there is clearly an argument for everyone here :)

They may not have meant weakest in the sense of "least valid", but rather "least likely to change minds".

One of my cats gets freaked out by fireworks and I'd love to see a cessation of the tradition, but I fully acknowledge that fans of fireworks aren't likely to show any concern for the impact on pets.

Sure, but one does not need to convince the fans of fireworks, rather one needs to convince enough fans of dogs (of which there are quite a few)

This is tactical in nature. In a democracy, you need to find a coalition to support what you want (either directly to vote for it, or indirectly to pressure their representatives).

All decisions of this sort come from a passionate group of people. I'm suggesting dog owners. This does not extend to how to make decisions.

I'm not following you. Lead them to what?

Do you really want to follow that logic through to stuff "we" like, but that large swathes of the general public finds objectionable? LIke, say, hacking? Crypto? (I mean communication, not currency) Porn? What you are advoating for is tyranny, not harmony.

See comments above -- its not logic for banning, its a coalition-building tactic, which is generally employed in most decisions we make/persuasions we carry out.

I don't see how your "comment above" is saying anything different than exactly what I said, just dressed up in non-threatening language. There's a razor thin line between 'coalition building' and 'mob rule'.

I think that if you look at a history of social changes you’ll very likely find that they all started with successful persuasion campaigns. Like it or not, if you want to preserve the rights we hold dear (as you mentioned above), you’re going to have to find people that agree with you, hopefully through facts and reason. While it’s possible to preserve rights solely through a well-built technocratic/representative government, the will of the people will always bubble up in some way, and you owe it to your causes to do everything you can to change that will/find people that agree. Whether this applies to fireworks or not, left as an exercise to the reader.

Best argument is everyone is given a free vision pro to enjoy sparkles in a quiet dark closet :D

a concern I'm looking into for a private project (I use hn as a link saver) is fireworks impact on birds. specifically interested in songbirds. however i dont think its a key component in their decline (https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaw1313) it is just a side issue to consider that perhaps there is something that can be done along side keeping domestic cats indoors and so forth. The key interest is overall the decline in songbirds and how this effects the tick population and thus lyme disease and other related illnesses. Perhaps banning fireworks would help, though it would be an uphill battle; yet probably easier than say banning neonicotinoids.

Interesting! I had never heard about that.

Yes, banning things is the American way. We should ban more things.

Banning things, adding taxes for things, providing incentives are all tools we have to manage externalities. We generally have a budget for how many restrictions we can impose, and we've banned plenty of things (such as slavery). Obviously we don't just go on a banning spree, but the argument that "banning is bad, America doesn't do it" is, IMO, not realistic or how our country has always operated.

Laundry detergent doesn't contain phosphate for similar reasons. Zoning laws generally have tight restrictions on what a land owner can build.

We watched the London countdown and fireworks on youtube and I felt annoyed by the fireworks a little bit and wanted to see more of the drone art. I agree, fireworks are archaic.

> I honestly believe we should ban fireworks and firework shows across the country.

Oh dear god, no!

Fireworks are on my list of "top favorite things". They're right up there with music, summertime, and barbecue.

Drones are not "just as cool". Half of the time drone shows look like the clunky laser shows from the 90's, but updated in the form of 3D point clouds. The drone kits are sold so often to advertising firms that the whole technique is cheapened. Every drone display I've seen has been an ad.

Not all dogs freak out at fireworks. The ones that do are more than likely scared of thunder too, and we can't ban that. (All of my dogs flat out ignored the fireworks, fwiw.)

Soldiers can have PSTD triggers from a variety of sources. Car backfire, crowds, news, lightening...

If you want to treat these as negative externalities, it seems like you could add a small tax on fireworks to pay for veterans causes.

Banning fireworks would ruin a lot of fun for a lot of people, and the upside seems negligible.

> Not all dogs freak out at fireworks. The ones that do are more than likely scared of thunder too, and we can't ban that.

> Soldiers can have PSTD triggers from a variety of sources. Car backfire, crowds, news, lightening...

Sure, but just because you can't eliminate all triggers doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't reduce the quantity and/or severity of some of them.

I disagree with large parts of what you said, but if my and others’ anger towards fireworks (which I actually do quite enjoy) results in a small tax on firework sales to fund veteran causes, in which I am a staunch believer, then not gonna lie I’d be thrilled.

Nothing against dogs here, but one of our greatest assets? If they all disappeared tomorrow I would hardly notice.

Let's make thunderstorms illegal, they scare dogs too.

> they also make the large majority of dogs terrified for at least two nights of the year. As humans, our symbiotic relationship with dogs is one of our greatest assets -- we owe them better than this.

Agreed.

Laser pointers should also be illegal.

Too many people are impervious to science.

This is why we also have the arguments "Think of the dogs!" and "Think of the veterans!", which no empathetic person can be against (even though, yes, these arguments employ an array of manipulation tactics...).

wait, you mean not enough people are impervious to science.

you see, many people consider their pets to also be people, and while fireworks are based on science, apparently these people are not impervious to that science. thus the conundrum.

As a dog owner, it's your responsibility to desensitize your dog by giving him a treat when a firework sets off for example.

What a load of crap. How about you get a treat, after a slap in the face?

My cats are scared of fireworks regardless of the amount of treats I give them.

Wildlife doesn't get treats at all.

Animals deserve our compassion and respect, just as we would prefer to be treated with compassion and respect by others.

What if I told you my dogs are afraid of drones but don't flinch at fireworks blowing up 400 ft above them?

I'm going to be rather blunt here because I love fireworks and your argument is tired and has been played out on every local nextdoor, reddit, and facebook group. The problem with the world today is everyone is so worried about offending someone else that they give up their own freedoms and that's where I draw the line. I'm sorry you hate fireworks but at the same time, I'm not. I'll continue traveling across the Colorado state line to buy my boom booms, and setting off my "illegal" fireworks in a safe manner. If we banned everything that could be potentially dangerous, we wouldn't have cars, electricity, or many other facets of life.

You do you, if you hate fireworks, please move some place far away from where other people might celebrate with fireworks. Same goes if you have PTSD, living near other people can be noisy at times and you might find refuge living far out in the woods, away from any thing that might trigger your PTSD. Lastly, please desensitize your dogs to fireworks. Everytime a firework goes off, turn it into a party for your dog with their favorite treats. Eventually the dog will look forward to the next boom.

Lastly, it's well known the NFPA has been anti-fireworks for over 100 years now. They produce one sided propaganda to support their straw man argument.

> You do you, if you hate fireworks, please move some place far away from where other people might celebrate with fireworks.

Where exactly is this place where people don't celebrate (whatever) by blowing up a little piece of it?

I live in the woods on 8 acres, on an island where fireworks are illegal (except for public shows), and there's a lot less fireworks than when I lived on a tiny lot near San Jose, CA. Fireworks were also illegal there, but that didn't stop people from shooting them off at midnight on new years, and about week afterwards, and then about a week starting Uno de Mayo, and then two weeks for 4th of July.

Here in my more secluded area, it's usually only new years and maybe a few the next two days and july 4th (all day) and 5th at night; which is better, but some of us just want to have quiet enjoyment.

Speaking of illegal fireworks… this hilarious thing happens in Hawaii on 4th July/NYE type holidays where people shoot off fireworks nonstop, cops driving around doing nothing, even though fireworks are illegal everywhere in the state!

Your freedom does not give you the right to infringe on my right to live in a noise and air pollution free environment. So why don't you go far away to do your polluting activity?

You have this right? Lucky you.

It does with cars.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com