Talk:Sulphur Bank Mine

Expanded article

Copy/paste into article namespace (66+kb) on Dec. 9 2009. Commented out my previous talk page posting of Aug. 30 2009.Marcia Wright (talk) 05:19, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

POV edits

The McLaughlin Mine section says the mine was the largest emitter of mercury into the environment. In fact, the EPA report talks about releases, which includes "off-site" releases of mercury (or other toxics) for disposal. As written, this article (and others, I'm sure) implies that mercury pollution of the environment is/was a problem with the mine. Not true. I alert editors to this POV problem here in hope that this article and others will be properly edited to avoid this bias. --S. Rich (talk) 17:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

McLaughlin Mine

I added some details about the mine, but it should really be spun off to its own page -- it has some geological connections to Sulphur Bank, but is some 22 miles distant, and was a notable gold mine. I'll put it on my (very long) to-do sometime (maybe) list. I did a little work in the area in the mid-80s. There's a lot of good information available at the UC Davis archive cited in the article. --Pete Tillman (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

UC Davis studies

This wiki states "Another theory is of geothermal springs being the source for inorganic mercury in Clear Lake, as there are abundant springs emanating from the lake bed" referencing Suchanek et al, 2008: "Mercury In Abiotic Matrices Of Clear Lake, California ... ,2008 p.2 of PDF." The referenced article outlines this "theory" of another author. The correct article to cite would be Natural cause for mercury pollution at Clear Lake, California, and paleotectonic inferences, J. C. Varekamp, A. F. Waibel, Article, Geology, 1987. Suchanek et al are, in actuality, arguing against this "theory" stating, "lake bed springs do not represent a significant independent source of Hg loading to Clear Lake." The next sentence of this wiki states, "Deep core samples of sediments taken in the 1980s show peaks of mercury during prehistoric times that 'likely originated from natural processes such as volcanic and/or tectonic activity within the Clear Lake Basin'" while citing Suchanek et al for a second time. While this quote is indeed from Suchanek et al., Suchanek et al are citing Varekamp and Waibel, 1987. As it stands, this section is biased toward a non-anthropogenic Hg source, citing sources from outside of "UC Davis studies" to make the point. The quote I gave above ("lake bed springs do not represent a significant independent source of Hg loading to Clear Lake.") from Suchanek et al should be included in this section as this is one of the major findings of the "UC Davis studies." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulfgarnaiilo (talk • contribs) 04:27, 6 February 2017 (UTC)