this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
53 points (100.0% liked)

Seattle

1574 readers
53 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

So... they simply settled on a pricetag for breaking the law

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And the people who were affected get nothing. This is transactional destruction of our resources between a business and the government.

[–] Thassodar@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Furthermore is the money obtained going to used to reverse the effects the event has on the environment? I doubt it.

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The article says the city built a water processing plant to help remove stuff including PCBs from the river flow in 2014, before the suit started in 2016.

It's not enough, but let's consider the $160 million as repaying the city for that initial capital expenditure.

[–] Thassodar@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago

To be fair I did not read the article, that's my fault.

[–] grandma@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

Ah yes, the cost of doing business