“US to Spend $250m on Cleanup at California’s Toxic Salton Sea.”

The Salton Sea is a toxic lake that is contaminated by runoff from nearby farms and wastewater. This is causing it to contain arsenic, selenium, and DDT which are toxic chemicals. The lake is slowly shrinking due to droughts and climate change, which is causing these chemicals to blow off and pollute the surrounding air which is causing major health issues for the communities near the lake. In the Inflation Reduction Act, the US government is putting $250 million over 4 years to restore the Salton Sea. This will consist of creating ways to limit the amount of dust blowing into the air from the lake by creating wetlands and ponds, and funding projects to find ways to restore the sea and keep the wildlife and people safe. 

 

This is related to environmental science because it is restoring an ecosystem that has been majorly affected by climate change and pollution. I think this is very a important cause because this lake has been an issue for a long time and there has been little done to fix these issues. In the communities surrounding the lake, one in five children is hospitalized for asthma and there are some of the largest adult asthma rates. Therefore, it is great the government is putting money and energy toward restoring this Lake. 

 

2 thoughts on ““US to Spend $250m on Cleanup at California’s Toxic Salton Sea.”

  1. I agree with you that it is great that the government is putting effort into fixing this ecosystem. I feel like the government is usually focusing on larger or “more important” issues so I wonder what it took for them to get involved with this matter. Do you think it’s more important to focus on smaller issues or tackle environmental issues on a large scale?

  2. I think this is a textbook example of humans having to clean up their own messes. I think it’s sad that more and more ecosystems- namely water based ones, are being compromised as a result of pollution. I find it interesting that rather than stop pollution, humans would rather just pay the cost of either fixing the ecosystem or the external cost of losing the ecosystem altogether. Which do you think people should strive for?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *