"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:07:05 GMT, "David Kendra"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:06:50 GMT, "David Kendra"
wrote:
So you suggest that we should not use this technology to clean up
toxic
waste sites? I do not believe many people will disagree that we
should
focus on minimizing pollution at it source, but your suggestions do
not
help resolve the issues of how to clean up pre-existing sites. What
should we do with the soil that you want the companies to remove?
What will we do with the residue that this creates?

Well, dumping the soil pollution as mercury vapour to the
atmosphere´is hardly an option. Only yesterday the US president
announced that mercury emissions to the atmosphere under his
administration's 'clean skies' initiative will need to be decreased by
69 %. So, how do you envision getting EPA to approve a technology
that increases it?

And what option do YOU recommend?

Oh, no particular option, it would depend on the circumstances,
and I am not an expert anyway. I am just not dumb enough to think
it might be a good idea to transform the mercury in the soil to
elemental mercury and vent it as mercury vapour into the atmosphere.

Did you bother to read any of their work to see just how much mercury is
released into the atmosphere via their system verses mercury vapor from
other sources? Probably not. At least they are working on a solution. It
is always easier to criticize someone else's work than to actually be
creative and solve a problem. Keep up the good work Torsten. I always
appreciate you comments :-)