Skip to main content

Search

Overview of Formosa Drainage Study

annika

This supplementary legal document describes recommendations for storm- and waste-water management improvements for the Formosa petrochemical plant in Calhoun County, Texas. The text is a fairly standard drainage assessment. The author describes non-trivial discharge of pollutants out of the plant’s outfalls, which drain into local waters, and the inability of the plant’s systems to prevent flooding from even small storms. For some context on this, it is pretty standard to design a stormwater system to be able to drain the 100-year storm (that is, the storm with a 1% or less chance of occurring in any given year). Formosa’s Texas plant demonstrated the inability to convey even the 2-year storm.

Formosa Drainage Study

annika

Emphases are mine:

Problem areas were identified based on the results from the outfall drainage studies provided by Formosa. Thus, all the results in the OPCC rely on those studies, uncertainities associated with those studies, and the assumptions made for those studies, some of which may or may not be appropriate as I pointed out in Supplement #2 [Page 4]” (3)

“The proposed improvements assume that the conveyance capacity of the problem areas is increased 100%, which would be able to handle twice as much flow that it currently does. The results from the Drainage Study are not conclusive as to what storm event Formosa’s system currently is capable of conveying. The report does mention that the system is not capable of conveying the 2-year storm, and “sometimes” not even the 1-year storm event. (3)

“A 45% contingency is applied to the OPCC due to the uncertainties associated with underground utilities, likelihood of existence of low road crossings and need to replace those, groundwater impacts, other unknowns, and additional costs associated with engineering, etc. 45% is reasonable and in line with industry practices in my experience, especially given the large amount of unknown information available.” (4) 

“My opinion from my July 9, 2018 report that “there have been and are still pellets and/or plastic materials discharges above trace amounts through Outfall 001” is further supported by the deposition testimony of Lisa Vitale, as representative for Freese & Nichols, Inc, that she and her colleagues have seen floating white pellets or small plastic pieces in Lavaca Bay and in the area near outfall 001 as part of her work on the receiving water monitoring program for Formosa’s TPDES permit...Ms. Vitale also testified that she told John Hyak of Formosa about these sightings as well as has sent him water samples with the pellets about five or six times, including at least one time prior to 2010. This, along with the June 2010 EPA Report I cited in my July Report, demonstrates to me that Formosa was aware of problems related to discharges of plastics from its facility since at least in 2010.” (6)

 

TS: Changhua County Media and NGO Coverage

tschuetz

Media coverage of the exhibition "Where the South Wind Blows"

Interview by PTS- Our Island (link1) (link2)、THE REPORTER (link1) (link2)

2012: PTS  photographer 鍾聖雄came to document village in the shadow the factory

 

TS: Changhua County Stakeholder Actions

tschuetz

Smelling the pollution 

Government initiated monitoring infrastructure not from the very beginning but only after the explosions

Ms Hsu’s family is respected, leading the talks between villagers and company  

Support by Mayor Ko

Asked the local councilors to take action (2002)

Protests

Photo collection, press conference, organized villagers to go to Taipei (they were more excited about the high speed rail?); visit and signature by the Vice president Chen 陳建仁

Ask the EPA to set up monitor (moving) 

“Number” system for reporting explosion/illegal emission

Witness Theatre

Exhibition in national museums 

Protest against the No. 8, especially after two  2010 explosions 

2005: Prof. Chang swimming naked; publishing 

Formosa Plastics: released two press releases after the exhibition, arguing that 1) people live long and 2) blaming individual behaviors (smoking? Drinking? betel nut?)

2010: Formosa starts investing in Mailiao 

2020: investigation into the reg

 

TS: Changhua County Stakeholders

tschuetz

No action by locals before the proposed No. 8 complex

Old Villagers (farmers, 100/280+ more than 80 years old.

Department of Hygiene

Young population moving to the city, and thinking about compensation

Formosa Plastics: You see the light, you see the money

Changhua Environmental Protection Union (彰化環保聯盟): learning about Formosa pollution issues after  a tour of the No. 5 complex