- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Proposed Graphite Plant for Port Manchac
Posted on 12/26/17 at 11:55 pm to Citica8
Posted on 12/26/17 at 11:55 pm to Citica8
Syrah Resources plans to dump 41,000 gallons per day of waste water into North Pass. At 8% salt (their numbers)*, that's 27,000 lbs of salt per day. Due to wind and tides, North Pass dumps into Lake Maurepas much of the time. Lake Maurepas salinity is Zero to 0.3% salt (ie fresh to slightly brackish). The vegetation in the Manchac swamp is already being killed by salt water intrusion.
Syrah Resources chose North Pass because it offered room to expand. So waste water and salt discharge rates will increase if this process is allowed.
Are Port Commissioners getting their pockets lined by Syrah Resources? How can a Private Company build a plant on public property?
A lot of questions for our elected officials (Note: Port Commissioners are not elected and not paid a salary). Maybe they are looking for other ways for a pay day.
This really needs to be stopped in its tracks.
This is a photo from Syrah Resources website of a waste water stream from their plant in South Africa. Looks to be about 30 gpm, 41,000 gal / day, which is what they plan to dump into North pass. The hell with these guys!
* Hammond Daily Star article on Wed 12/20/2017, page 2, Quoted by Paul Jahn, chief operations officer for Syrah Resources Battery Anode Materials Project.
Syrah Resources chose North Pass because it offered room to expand. So waste water and salt discharge rates will increase if this process is allowed.
Are Port Commissioners getting their pockets lined by Syrah Resources? How can a Private Company build a plant on public property?
A lot of questions for our elected officials (Note: Port Commissioners are not elected and not paid a salary). Maybe they are looking for other ways for a pay day.
This really needs to be stopped in its tracks.
This is a photo from Syrah Resources website of a waste water stream from their plant in South Africa. Looks to be about 30 gpm, 41,000 gal / day, which is what they plan to dump into North pass. The hell with these guys!
* Hammond Daily Star article on Wed 12/20/2017, page 2, Quoted by Paul Jahn, chief operations officer for Syrah Resources Battery Anode Materials Project.
This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 9:24 am
2
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:40 am to Nawlens Gator
quote:
Lake Maurepas salinity is Zero to 0.3% salt
quote:Please provide a link where the "8% salt" number is provided.
At 8% salt (their numbers), that's 27,000 lbs of salt per day.
This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 12:46 am
Posted on 12/27/17 at 12:59 am to tommy2tone1999
Tommy, please see source in my edit. It's in the Hammond Daily star quote from Syrah Resources officer Paul Jahn.
From the Daily Star reporter Lauren Langlois who attended the public meeting with Paul Jahn:
So that's over 27,000 lbs of salt they want to dump daily into a fresh to slightly brackish estuary. Yeah I'm against it.
From the Daily Star reporter Lauren Langlois who attended the public meeting with Paul Jahn:
quote:
"Syrah Resources expects to discharge 41,000 gallons a day into North Pass. Water would have calcium chloride and sodium chloride, with an estimated 8 percent salinity at the point of the discharge said Paul Jahn, Chief operations officer for the company's Anode Materials Project."
So that's over 27,000 lbs of salt they want to dump daily into a fresh to slightly brackish estuary. Yeah I'm against it.
This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 9:22 am
Posted on 12/27/17 at 5:12 am to Citica8
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks people are freaking out over nothing.
Posted on 12/27/17 at 6:58 am to Nawlens Gator
I tried to do my due diligence but I’m not paying to read a local newspaper I’ve never heard of until just now from Hammond. Looked up a few other articles and the numbers you mentioned are not quoted.
Per the advocate
Per WWL
If you are against the plant, I have no issue with that, but let’s base the argument on facts not environmental propaganda, I’m still firm in my belief that no new permit will be written than allows them to do anything close to what you’re describing.
Per the advocate
quote:
Syrah has applied to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality for air and water permits. The company proposes to release annually about 38 tons of particulate matter, .93 tons of hydrochloric acid, .52 tons of hydrogen fluoride and .004 tons of formaldehyde into the air, according to permit documents. The plant also proposes to pump 41,000 gallons of water used in the manufacturing process into North Pass on a daily basis.
Per WWL
quote:Zero mention of the sality of the water being 8-10% being discharged.
After explaining the process, which includes a salt-based discharge, the potential impacts to the environment and the probable economic benefits for the area, the crowd of residents and business owners peppered Jahn with their concerns about water and air quality, property values, as well as transparency with the public.
The company says it has dust and emission control systems for the milling operation, which includes filters. Syrah also says the salts in the discharge to be created, which could be as much as 41,000 gallons of water a day, are similar to electrolytes in Gatorade and, according to research and a hydrology study, will not be different in composition than what's already in North Pass.
If you are against the plant, I have no issue with that, but let’s base the argument on facts not environmental propaganda, I’m still firm in my belief that no new permit will be written than allows them to do anything close to what you’re describing.
Posted on 12/27/17 at 7:26 am to Mark Makers
quote:
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks people are freaking out over nothing.
Posted on 12/27/17 at 7:38 am to Nawlens Gator
quote:
41,000 gallons per day of waste water into North Pass. At 8% salt (their numbers)*, that's 27,000 lbs of salt per day.
To put this into perspective, you’re claiming the equivalent of 11, 2500lb pallets of pool salt
in two of these 20,000 gallon pools
every day, 365 days a year. There’s no way that happens. 
Posted on 12/27/17 at 4:07 pm to Citica8
quote:
Citica8
quote:
I don't have a dog in this fight with this plant happening, just expressing my opinion that there is no chance that with today's EPA and DEQ standards will a new construction plant get a permit that allows them to discharge effluent that is "3x the salt concentration of the ocean" into Pass Manchac or North Pass, especially considering the state of the coast.
There's a very well-known poster in this thread who told us very early on-in absolute terms-that the level you mention-Triple the salt concentration of the ocean-was NOTHING and this was fine.
He then went on to say anyone who disagreed owns a camp and pollutes out there also, then wildly veered back across the conversational double-yellow line as it were to call those same folks, "environmentalists," yadda yadda yadda.
He turns out dead wrong and pounces now that it turns out the permit shows they'll filter the water to reduce down to almost nothing the amount of potential pollution and/or salinity being discussed as his proof of concept. While forgetting that he said even without it there was nothing to worry about.
Some choice cuts from this thread:
quote:
I B Freeman
quote:
Get real people. Those discharge amounts are NOTHING. Very small and not dangerous.
Yet evidently they're so dangerous the plant is going to install filters to completely remove this particulate/effluent from the discharge water? Why would they do that if it's very small and not dangerous? It seems unnecessary based on his assurances.
quote:
I B Freeman
quote:
I know less than a ton of hydrochloric acid per year is NOTHING in an amount of water it is going in.
It seems like the plant and LDEQ disagree with him. Hmmm.
quote:
I B Freeman
quote:
I know the 40,000 gallon waste water is nothing if the DEQ standards apply--we have good DEQ water standards in Louisiana. If they have approved 40000 gallon a day I am not concerned.
Notice the tweak in his HOTTAKE here:
quote:
I B Freeman
quote:
If they are running their waste process water that contains salt through a RO process their will be very little precipitants in it.
Let's rewind again...
quote:
I B Freeman
quote:
Get real people. Those discharge amounts are NOTHING. Very small and not dangerous.
Hmmm...
Posted on 12/27/17 at 5:43 pm to GFunk
I stand behind the statement that if the DEQ approved the waste water permit it is nothing to worry about.
I also stand behind my original comment that the article contains NO information that should alarm anyone.
There is not a single sentence in the article in the OP about salt and not a single piece of evidence the DEQ has approved a waste water permit allowing a salt water discharge into the Manchac swamp.
What am I dead wrong on? Nothing.
You are a hysterical whiner that makes up problems.
This is the only thing in the article about discharges---
None of those discharges described in that paragraph should cause a critical thinking person the hysterics you are experiencing.
I also stand behind my original comment that the article contains NO information that should alarm anyone.
There is not a single sentence in the article in the OP about salt and not a single piece of evidence the DEQ has approved a waste water permit allowing a salt water discharge into the Manchac swamp.
What am I dead wrong on? Nothing.
You are a hysterical whiner that makes up problems.
This is the only thing in the article about discharges---
quote:
Syrah has applied to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality for air and water permits. The company proposes to release annually about 38 tons of particulate matter, .93 tons of hydrochloric acid, .52 tons of hydrogen fluoride and .004 tons of formaldehyde into the air, according to permit documents. The plant also proposes to pump 41,000 gallons of water used in the manufacturing process into North Pass on a daily basis.
None of those discharges described in that paragraph should cause a critical thinking person the hysterics you are experiencing.
This post was edited on 12/27/17 at 5:47 pm
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:19 am to I B Freeman
Syrah's permit application (AI 209281) is full of errors, question answers are wrong and misleading, and the NPDES Permit Rating Work Sheet for this application is not correct. The NPDES Rating by Syrah gives a rating of 55, when the rating should be 95. This entire process proposal is a scam and needs to be stopped now.
This post was edited on 12/29/17 at 1:33 am
Posted on 12/29/17 at 1:44 pm to Nawlens Gator
Certainly if their permit is denied by DEQ they will not operate.
Posted on 12/30/17 at 7:44 am to I B Freeman
Man. A lot of ignorant sensationalists in this thread.
It’s obvious who has an environmental permitting background and who doesn’t.
I challenge you to look at other permits/permit applications if you think this is bad. You’ll go crawling inside your safe space.
Take a look at a papermill LPDES permit. Esp one that isn’t discharging into an effluent limiting receiving stream
It’s obvious who has an environmental permitting background and who doesn’t.
I challenge you to look at other permits/permit applications if you think this is bad. You’ll go crawling inside your safe space.
Take a look at a papermill LPDES permit. Esp one that isn’t discharging into an effluent limiting receiving stream
Posted on 12/30/17 at 8:16 am to BigHoss
quote:
obvious who has an environmental permitting background and who doesn’t.
I agree, there are flaws in many permits.
When speaking of this one the air permit calcs in the application lacks evidence of where assumed HF and HCl concentrations were derived. Their consultant simply stated "from client". That's fine and all, but was this "from client" based on testing at similar facilities? Did client pull it out their....?
Those 5ppm numbers form the basis for their PET and should be questioned. Also, why was an exact facility permitted in the neighbor parish and recended?
Posted on 12/30/17 at 10:06 am to Dock Holiday
Usually manufacturer specs. And if you read the air permit it says you must prove compliance usually within 30-60 days of first fire.
Posted on 12/30/17 at 11:30 am to BigHoss
quote:
Usually manufacturer specs.
Not what the permit app calcs say.
quote:
And if you read the air permit
There is not a permit to review only an application.
quote:
says you must prove compliance usually within 30-60 days of first fire.
If there was an air permit that is not what it would say. You have to prove compliance within 180 days of commissioning, but this is not a combustion unit and also not likely a facility that would trigger stack testing as you are implying.
Posted on 12/30/17 at 2:37 pm to Dock Holiday
Still required to prove emissions. Either by manufacturer certs or source testing.
And as I’m sure you know. As you said. It’s an application. They don’t have to prove everything in the app. LDEQ/EPA can come back with requests for specifications.
And as I’m sure you know. As you said. It’s an application. They don’t have to prove everything in the app. LDEQ/EPA can come back with requests for specifications.
This post was edited on 12/30/17 at 2:40 pm
Posted on 12/30/17 at 4:07 pm to BigHoss
quote:
Still required to prove emissions. Either by manufacturer certs or source testing.
No. There are 1000's of sources across the state that are approved and operated and never required to prove PTE by manufacturers certifications or testing.
Posted on 1/2/18 at 11:50 pm to Dock Holiday
Syrah labels North Pass a drainage ditch in their LDEQ water permit application, and make other low ball errors so they can avoid an Environmental Impact Review. A Drainage Ditch? Come on people wake up. North Pass is a named Bayou that flow into major known estuaries to the east and west. This is a MAJOR source. Not a MNOR source as they propose to avoid a needed environmental impact study.
Stagnation occurs in North Pass during slack tides and low winds and their process waste stream will be a serious environmental Hazard during these times. Their process waste water can easily exceed 10% in North Pass during these times. An environmental impact study is needed.
A storm water pollution Plan is not even provided in the application. Hwy 51 is submerged for days during flooding from storm waters on a frequent basis. How will graphite factory workers even get in or out of this factory during these flooding events?
Check out this report about Graphite Plants: http//www.washingtonpostpost.graphics/business/batteries/graphite-mining-pollution-china. We residents in this area DO NOT want this pollution in our environment.
Stagnation occurs in North Pass during slack tides and low winds and their process waste stream will be a serious environmental Hazard during these times. Their process waste water can easily exceed 10% in North Pass during these times. An environmental impact study is needed.
A storm water pollution Plan is not even provided in the application. Hwy 51 is submerged for days during flooding from storm waters on a frequent basis. How will graphite factory workers even get in or out of this factory during these flooding events?
Check out this report about Graphite Plants: http//www.washingtonpostpost.graphics/business/batteries/graphite-mining-pollution-china. We residents in this area DO NOT want this pollution in our environment.
This post was edited on 1/3/18 at 12:14 am
Posted on 1/3/18 at 5:59 am to Nawlens Gator
A swp3 isn’t required in an LPDES application
Posted on 1/3/18 at 8:05 am to Nawlens Gator
SWPPP is different BAW
Page 4 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News