Central Chemical Corp.

History of Central Chemical Corp.
In important ways, the circumstances surrounding Thomas’s entry into the fertilizer business were not propitious. First, Thomas began business near the end of a half-century-long relocation of the fertilizer industry’s center. Though fertilizer use continued to increase in the Mid-Atlantic states and elsewhere during the period from 1870 to 1920, the manufacture of fertilizer began to shift to the Southern states in the late nineteenth century. By 1902, Charleston had replaced Baltimore as the fertilizer capital of the country. The Mid-Atlantic states’ share of total fertilizer use decreased from 34% in 1880 to 14% in 1920. By contrast, in 1920 the South-Atlantic states used about 50% of all fertilizers consumed in the U.S. Thus, Hagerstown could no longer enjoy proximity to the major centers of fertilizer-material production, and, while previously situated between the two highest-fertilizer-use regions of the country, it now found itself on the northern edge of a region that now dwarfed all others.

Second, Thomas’s decision to continue in the practice (apparently favored by Hagerstown companies) of making fertilizer primarily from bone and organic materials came at the start of a rapid increase in the demand for mixed fertilizers, but also at the beginning of a precipitous decline in the use of bone and bone products as a source of phosphorous in fertilizers. With the growing use of potash and phosphate rock, consumption of mixed fertilizers grew from 46% of the total in 1880 to around 70% in 1920. During the period from 1890 to 1910, when Thomas was focusing on his presumably unmixed “dissolved bone” fertilizers, mixed fertilizers were capturing market share.

Furthermore, the period from 1880 to 1920 is also characterized by the decreasing use of organic materials in general. Though organic materials provided about 91% of the total nitrogen in 1900, by 1917 the total nitrogen contribution from organics had dropped to 46.5%. With regard to phosphates, bone meal, dissolved bones and boneblack, and phosphoro-guano use peaked in 1890, but their use dropped to a negligible amount by 1910 as the use of superphosphates from phosphate rock increased dramatically..

Third, even as Thomas had begun his business trading fertilizer for livestock from relatively distant places, the fertilizer industry was increasingly turning to local distribution. Though mid-nineteenth-century fertilizer plants typically were situated in East Coast harbor cities, twentieth-century plants were dispersed to be closer to areas of consumption.

Finally, even though the name “Thomas’ Dissolved Bone” suggests that Thomas produced his own superphosphates initially, the use of bone in the production of superphosphates was on its way out as described above. For all practical purposes, then, Thomas had set his business on the track of the second, smaller type of fertilizer company, which only mixed fertilizer and did not produce superphosphates. For the next 90 years, even when Central Chemical had affiliates across the nation, it would remain in this “smaller” category – relying on large suppliers for its materials. For reasons noted above, this was not a problem at the turn of the century vis-à-vis the larger companies. Starting in the 1890s, however, many agricultural societies began to advocate home mixing of fertilizer materials by farmers. Throughout the first half of the twentieth century, the fertilizer industry fought this effort successfully by insisting on the value of industrial mixing processes and the farmer’s comparative disadvantages in mixing.

Though in its early years, Central Chemical advertised itself as “Exporters – Manufacturers – Importers,” by the 1970s it had become little more than a middle-man between larger suppliers and farmers. It did not import its own materials, but purchased granulated materials from suppliers. There is no evidence that Central Chemical was exporting products out of the country anymore. And its manufacturing capacity consisted of mixing pre-processed granulated materials in various proportions. At this point, its consulting capacity became equally important to its factory processes.

Though Central Chemical and its subsidiaries were taking in a combined $25 million in sales by the late 1970s, an employee remembers that there was always a sense of trouble on the horizon. The vulnerability of a company that adds very little value to its product and relies entirely on contracts with larger suppliers requires no explanation. It appears that not long after Central Chemical became a bulk blender, its large suppliers began pushing their advantages. In the early 70s, Central Chemical’s supplier, Agrico Chemical Company, put pressure on Central Chemical to enter into a long-term contract. When Central Chemical refused, Agrico withheld di-ammonium phosphate and granular triple super phosphate at a time of national shortage in these materials. Central Chemical responded by filing an antitrust lawsuit against Agrico in federal court. For most of the next decade much of the time, resources, and energy of what was still a closely-held corporation would be consumed in this litigation. Ultimately the lawsuit proved unsuccessful.

All of this came at the same time that local, state, federal regulators were investigating the Hagerstown plant for its pesticide-disposal practices. In the 1970s the State of Maryland ordered two separate cleanups of the site; the EPA was just getting started.

Ultimately the push to eliminate the middle man that drove the switch to bulk blending began to turn on the blenders themselves. The larger companies and farmers wised up, and realized that they could both save money by dealing directly with each other. Farmers began buying direct-application materials from the same suppliers used by Central Chemical. By the early 1980s, Central Chemical’s network of fertilizer blenders had contracted substantially. Blending operations like those of the Hagerstown plant could no longer make the case for themselves. Crushed under the weight of increasingly serious environmental liability for its mid-century disposal practices, the Central Chemical Corporation contracted its operations substantially. The Hagerstown plant ceased operations in 1984 and the office headquarters moved from the old Thomas building to an office outside Hagerstown.


Translate

Friday, March 11, 2016

Review links Agent Orange to bladder cancer, hypothyroidism

Since there were chemicals at Central Chemical , like the ones used to make Agent Orange
I decided to post this information:

USA TODAY NETWORKPatricia Kime, Military Times4:39 p.m. EST March 10, 2016
A new review of Agent Orange research found evidence that bladder cancer and hypothyroidism are more strongly linked to exposure to the herbicide than previously thought, but the science does not support a previously held belief that spina bifida occurs in the offspring of exposed veterans at higher rates.
A report released Thursday by the Institute of Medicine on the health effects of Agent Orange also recommended the Department of Veterans Affairsgrant service-connected presumption to veterans with “Parkinson’s-like symptoms,” not just those diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease related to Agent Orange exposure.
“There is no rational basis for exclusion of individuals with Parkinson’s-like symptoms from the service-related category denoted as Parkinson’s disease," members of the Institute of Medicine panel wrote in the report.
The 1,115-page review is the final in a series conducted by the Institute of Medicine on health problems related to Agent Orange and other herbicide use during the Vietnam War.
The panel, chaired by Kenneth Ramos, professor of medicine at the Arizona Health Sciences Center, University of Arizona, looked at the scientific literature on Agent Orange released between October 2012 and September 2014 for its review.
The decision on bladder cancer and hypothyroidism was tied to results of a large study of Korean War veterans who served in the Vietnam War and suggested an association, while the choice to downgrade spina bifida was based on a lack of data, panel members said.
“(The inclusion of) spina bifida in the limited or suggestive category of association was based on preliminary findings from (an ongoing Air Force study). However, to date, a complete analysis of the data from that study for neural tube defects has not been published … (and) no subsequent studies have found increases in spina bifida with exposure to components of the herbicides sprayed in Vietnam," they wrote.
The upgrade for bladder cancer and hypothyroidism from the category “inadequate or insufficient evidence” to “limited or suggestive evidence," of a link, as well as the recommendation to include Parkinson’s-like symptoms to the service-connected list could pave the way for thousands of veterans to receive health care and disability compensation from VA.
The downgrading of spina bifida marks only the second time the Institute of Medicine Agent Orange committee has demoted a health outcome related to the herbicide.
Roughly 2.6 million U.S. veterans served in Vietnam, and many of them may have been exposed. The herbicide, named for the color of the metal containers used to store it, was sprayed over 20% of the country to strip the jungle of its vegetation where enemy troops could hide.
Veterans who served in Vietnam on the ground or on boats that patrolled the country's inland waterways are eligible for health care and compensation for certain conditions presumed to be connected to their service.
Other groups of veterans, including those who served after the war on aircraft that had been used to spray Agent Orange, have won recognition for illnesses they say are related to exposure to chemical residue.
Some veterans continue to seek recognition and presumption for exposure to the herbicide, including those who served on ships in the bays, harbors and territorial seas of Vietnam. Attorneys for Military-Veterans Advocacy and the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Association on Thursday presented oral arguments to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to recognize that the court has jurisdiction to decide whether the VA should not have excluded these veterans from the presumption.
Retired Navy Cmdr. John Wells, executive director of Military-Veterans Advocacy, said the sailors who served on these ships should be included because the vessels' distillation systems used water contaminated with Agent Orange to produce drinking water as well as water used for their boilers.
In their report, the Institute of Medicine panel made several recommendations to the VA to address illnesses in Vietnam veterans, to include recommending that VA continue to study their health, develop protocols to investigate transmission of adverse effects to offspring by exposed fathers and design a study on the health consequences of dioxin exposure on humans.
They also recommended that the Defense Department and VA monitor potential service-related health effects in military personnel, to include creating and maintaining rosters of individuals deployed on missions and linking Defense Department and VA databases to identify, record and monitor trends in diseases.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/03/10/review-links-agent-orange-bladder-cancer-hypothyroidism/81605808/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_campaign=usatoday-newstopstories
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, March 4, 2016

Hagerstown Water Contaminated with High Trihalomethanes Levels prior to 2015

Sunday, February 21, 2016





HAGERSTOWN, MD - With recent media attention to Flint, Michigan and Crystal City, Texas, local residents may be wondering if their own drinking water is safe.

The Safe Water Drinking Act requires public utilities to distribute on a yearly basis a Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) listing the results for EPA regulated and unregulated contaminants.

According to the 2014 consumer confidence report, the City of Hagerstown found a level of 98 ppb Trihalomethanes, which exceeds the EPA requirements of 80 ppb. 

The report states:
Currently, the City of Hagerstown is operating under a consent agreement with the State of Maryland while it undergoes significant upgrades to the R.C. Willson
 Water Treatment Plant. Some people who drink water containing halo acetic acids or trihalomethanes in excess of the MCL over many years may experience problems
 with their liver, kidneys, or central nervous system, and may have an increased risk of getting cancer.

The City of Hagerstown provides water to Williamsport, Smithsburg, and Funkstown. 
 The 2015 CCR report was not available at the time of writing this article, nor was any data on how long the consent agreement has been in place. However, documents  reaching as far back as 1980 show Hagerstown with a traditionally high concentration 
of trihalomethanes (THMs). The Herald-Mail wrote an article about the City's water in 2001, in which it was recommended that pregnant women only drink bottled water. Additionally, 
test data between 2004 and 2007 shows repeated high levels of THMs.

According to the World Health Organization, THMs are formed in drinking-water primarily as a result of chlorination of organic matter present naturally in raw water supplies. 
THMs include Chloroform, Bromoform, Dibromochloromethane, and Bromodichloromethane. 
Chloroform is a known carcinogen, while Bromodichloromethane is known to cause reproductive effects, including stillbirth.

Interestingly enough, the City of Hagerstown has posted a notice on its website that in August 2015, water treatment processes were to switch from chlorine to chloramines "
in order to comply with new federal regulatory standards." The notice states that Kidney Dialysis Patients, Businesses using water for food or beverage manufacturing, commercial laundering operations, laboratory procedures, seafood handling or any other processes, or Fish, Pond, and Amphibian Owners, should take special precautions and steps for dealing with the chloramines in the water supply.

Residents interested in learning more should contact the Hagerstown Utilities Department.

Ken Buckler is the editor of the WashCo Chronicle.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)