Submitted by Additional-Force-795 t3_11tx0yr in news
Gorgoth24 t1_jcot10z wrote
Reply to comment by vahntitrio in Levels of carcinogenic chemical near Ohio derailment site far above safe limit by Additional-Force-795
Inverse square doesn't work well for most ground contaminants. Rainfall tends to collect the contaminant back into streams and rivers then transport it downstream where concentration is based on different math. Initial concentration * e ^ (-1 * constant * time) where the constant varies per material is how it's typically simplified for point discharge. There are a variety of factors in a material that was concentrated, released in various forms, re-concentrated as runoff, then transported downstream as it settles.
My understanding is that decent modeling software exists but it takes time and money to get decent environmental engineers to do an analysis.
losterweil t1_jcqgkvw wrote
After contributing to this thread I went on a little research project… what I concluded is lawyers are only collecting people from a 30 mile radius. That’s about it. There is diddly squat besides that.
Gorgoth24 t1_jcqhz16 wrote
Expected profitability for a lawsuit probably follows inverse square math
losterweil t1_jcstesw wrote
You’re on the scent. I also have read a source(I don’t remember) which said contaminates most likely blew over 200 hundred miles.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments