• deranger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 days ago

    It’s still an illegal discharge. There are multiple things listed that are not good for the local environment. Even phosphorus and ammonia can be damaging by stimulating algae blooms.

    • DevoidWisdom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      It’s not though. TCEQ authorized a discharge water permit and has investigated the water discharge. Now, if people are being dishonest, that’s another story, that will likley be somthing we find out some years in the future. Your not wrong about algae blooms. Though, the lab didnt sample the water straight from the discharge source but further down the ditch. And thats all farmland around there. Farms use ammonia nitrate, as fertilizer.

      • Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Neither hexavalent chromium nor arsenic appears in Tesla’s TCEQ discharge permit as an allowable pollutant. Neither was tested for during TCEQ’s February investigation.

      • deranger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        What it did not do, explicitly, was grant Tesla the right to use public or private property for wastewater conveyance.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        Oh wow the state of Texas authorized it? Well in that case I’m sure it’s fine! They’re renowned for their environmental safety and concern.