Where water carried history

Symbolic image of chemical pollution in rivers (KI generated)

A quiet evening and a backward-looking realization

It was a few weeks after the flood of the century in Dresden in 2002. The water had receded, sandbag lines had been removed, and the first traces had already been cleared away. But on a Friday afternoon, as our physical exhaustion slowly gave way to a sense of calm, we sat in a familiar circle at the kitchen table of a good friend. I still remember how grateful she smiled at us for helping her clean up the flood damage for hours. We were all very thoughtful and deeply moved. Not only had our beloved hometown of Dresden been severely damaged by the floods, but people had also lost their lives, others had been injured, and still others had lost a life that would never be the same again.

What initially seemed to us over the past few weeks to be just a review of the current water levels, the next impending wave, the brutal destructive force of our little river Weißeritz, our joint action with sandbag chains, and the emergency reports (which we followed very closely in the media), and the flood of media reports from around the world, suddenly turned into a completely different conversation.

Perhaps it was the foul, musty, and sometimes acrid smell that had been hanging in the air for hours.

I'm a little surprised myself that 23 years have already passed.

But I remember it as if it were yesterday. Martin suddenly said, “Do you remember how the Elbe stank back then, and how it was almost unbearable in summer...” We suddenly started thinking about where the water from the Elbe and Weißeritz rivers actually flowed. I remember being overcome by a brief, intense shudder at the thought, because the terrible chemical smells, the exhaust fumes from the Trabants (Trabi), i.e., highly concentrated clouds of CO, benzene, HC, NOx, soot particles and oil mist, the smell of warm tar paper on the garage roofs, the countless industrial exhaust fumes and solvents had already affected me intensely as a little girl. Even as a toddler, I often suffered from severe bronchial infections for many weeks at a time. Back then, I swore to myself that when I grew up, I would never drive a Trabant, because those “blue” clouds were hell for me and my coughing fits wouldn't stop, my eyes watered and I always felt nauseous.

Suddenly, things got a little hectic in our group. Our thoughts were racing, and each of us kept thinking of new “toxic” locations from the old GDR era, wondering what our Elbe and Weißeritz rivers had carried with them. Because we, too, had experienced symptoms in recent weeks such as intense respiratory irritation, asthma attacks, skin rashes, headaches, allergic reactions, irritated mucous membranes, some gastrointestinal complaints and increasing physical weakness.

We had all grown up in the former GDR, and many of us still had vivid memories of our region's dense industrial history. We thought of overcrowded sewage treatment plants, chemical fumes, countless pungent and acrid smells, metalworking factories, pulp mills, uranium mining, rivers and streams that were orange, reddish, purple, or brown, dead fish floating in the Elbe River, countless pesticides sprayed over our fields, and twice, while walking near a field and once in the forest, a helicopter simply dumped its toxic cargo over our heads without warning, because back then, pesticides were often sprayed over large areas from the air.

In August 2002, there was flooding, and during the fall of 2002, I suffered increasingly frequent and severe respiratory infections and asthma attacks, which developed into pneumonia. My family doctor at the time was desperate because the respiratory infections would not go away, so he gave me two pneumococcal vaccinations (“Pneumopur”) and to be on the safe side, combined them with a tetanus booster shot. As a precaution, he also immediately checked my hepatitis A status. But completely unexpectedly, further massive side effects developed. ... terrible weeks were to follow for me ...

Suddenly, there they were, countless unvarnished images in our minds ...

In our minds, the Weißeritz became a transport medium connecting over 30 km of industrial history and, under these flood conditions, presumably also a genuine chemical vector solution, as there was a high concentration of industrial, chemical, and metalworking companies along the Weißeritz with potentially relevant contaminated sites for the 2002 flood.

We began to mentally reconstruct the Weißeritz upstream, i.e., from its mouth in Dresden to its origins in the Ore Mountains. What unfolded on our sheet of paper was not a topographical journey, but a true toxicological journey into the past. Passing the many abandoned industrial sites, former electroplating plants, old factory buildings, seepage points, uranium dumps... we gathered more and more information and were shocked by the enormous density of industrial history. We wondered what of this sedimented past might have been remobilized by the flooding and what was visible and what was not. In our families and among our friends and acquaintances, there had already been enough cases of cancer, leukemia, heart disease and much more that we knew of in the past. By 2025 (when I am writing these lines), this number had increased dramatically. My dad, my sister, my aunt, my girlfriend, several good friends, and acquaintances have all been affected by aggressive forms of cancer (kidney, liver, breast, lung) or leukemia (AML and CML) in recent years.

Let's start with the Weißeritz

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Flood_in_Freital_2002._024.jpg
Photo: Dieter Rebhahn, CC BY 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

1. The Wilde Weißeritz rises near Moldava (CZ) and feeds the Klingenberg and Lehnmühle dams. Mining activities also took place there, for example at Bärenhecke and Johnsbach (a Wismut mining area). The Rote Weißeritz rises near Zinnwald and flows through numerous historic mining and industrial towns before joining the Wilde Weißeritz in Freital.
   
2. Source area: Zinnwald/Altenberg, i.e. mining area with tin, tungsten, uranium ores and, since the 15th century, uranium exploration (mining until 1990), i.e. possible heavy metals (uranium, arsenic, lead, mercury), radionuclides, acidic mine water - persistent heavy metals from mining?
3. Geising / Bärenstein, i.e., tin ore processing, stamping mills, small-scale metalworking, i.e., possible heavy metals, PAHs, contaminated sludge
4. Upper reaches: Dippoldiswalde/Rabenau, i.e., wood processing, small-scale industry, former textile factories, possible cumulative inputs such as wood preservatives, paints, dyes, PAHs, solvents—suspension of particulate pollutants → erosion of sediment load → flooded brownfield sites with groundwater seepage?
5. Seifersdorf / Rabenau: VEB Polstermöbel Oelsa (Seifersdorf plant), i.e. textile and furniture production (wood preservatives, varnishes, formaldehyde, heavy metals)

In the area that followed, we saw real hotspot compression, i.e., heavy industry and the history of Wismut.

1. Lower reaches: Freital (Zauckerode, Döhlen), i.e. VEB Steinkohlenwerk Freital “Willi Agatz” coal mine, VEB Eisenhammerwerk Dresden-Dölzschen ironworks (oils, heavy metals), VEB Freitaler Lederfabrik / Ostritzer Lederwerke leather factory (chrome), Wismut tailings (uranium, radium-226), brown coal mining, VEB Pressenwerk Freital, VEB Welta Kamera Werke, VEB Spezialmaschinen- und Wachspapierfabrik Freital, VEB Glaswerk Freital, VEB Edelstahlwerk “8. Mai 1945” Freital (steel, special alloys, and titanium), VEB Rumbo soap factory Freital, Bussard chemical plant, VEB screw factory Freital, VEB conveyor technology Freital, casting and metal processing, among others. What could this mean? Cont. Sediments, i.e. possibly: uranium, arsenic, cadmium, mercury, mineral oils, PAHs, PCBs, solvents, chlorine compounds, oils, asbestos, heavy metals such as Zn, Cu, Pb) – chemical tipping point due to diffuse accumulation of contaminated sites?!
2. Freital center Contaminated sites, i.e., gas stations, workshops, former landfills along the river course; possible mobilization of oils, solvents, and PCBs here
3. The SDAG Wismut operated uranium mining in the Dresden Gittersee/Coschütz/Heidenschanze area until the 1980s, with tailings piles such as Tailings Pile A in the Kaitzbachtal valley. The last radioactive uranium waste tailings pile in Dresden is being cleaned up, published on November 27, 2023, on Striesen-oiger.de.
4. Dresden – Plauen Weißeritzgrünzug Partially sealed former industrial sites (small commercial enterprises were located here during the GDR era), possible moisture penetration of contaminated soil, suspension pollution, and the former VEB Eisenhammerwerk Dresden-Dölzschen ironworks and railway operations, i.e., possible waste oils, PAHs, heavy metals.
5. Dresden Friedrichstadt along the Weißeritz River, i.e., the residential district of Friedrichstadt, the area around the main train station, electroplating plants, dry cleaners, railway depots, hospital, layers of rubble, heavy metals, which could mean the formation of halogenated hydrocarbons and microbiological contamination. During the GDR era, the following companies were also located there: VEB Asbestverarbeitung (2 plants – asbestos processing), VEB Akkumulatorenwerk (batteries/rechargeable batteries), VEB Altstoffhandel Dresden (recycling/secondary raw materials), VEB Arzneimittelwerk Dresden (pharmaceutical production), VEB Anemometerbau Dresden (measurement technology), and others. ... We wonder what the situation is here in terms of possible combined risks, i.e., flooded basement rooms + contaminated Weißeritz river? Hydrological bottleneck + toxic “sink” for sediment accumulation?
6. The confluence with the Elbe, i.e., Dresden city center/accumulation in flood areas—the Marienbrücke bridge probably became a sediment trap and thus a potential sedimentation and pollution hub. (Sedimentation dynamics, i.e., deposition of contaminated fine sediments in depressions, e.g., Friedrichstadt? Deposition of flood sludge, i.e., concentrated deposition of transport cargo from the upper reaches? Possible long-term risks → re-entry in the event of renewed flooding → groundwater contamination in the event of sediment displacement? Potential export zone for toxic cargo into the Elbe river network?

Flood in Freital 2002: Photo, Dieter Rebhahn, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flood_in_Freital_2002._071.jpg

IIn 2002, many areas suspected of being contaminated along the Weißeritz river and in Freital had not yet been remediated, and the flood probably hit a city structure that was not prepared for toxicological hazards.

We then turned our attention to the Elbe ...

During the GDR era, the Elbe was a veritable toxic river, fed by a long chain of industrial dischargers.

1. Czech Republic (then ČSSR) – Elbe river source area – Ústí nad Labem (Aussig) Chemické závody Ústí Chemicals, fertilizers, paints, i.e. also ammonia, heavy metals, phenols, chlorine compounds
2. Lovosice Lovochemie Fertilizer production, including nitrates, phosphates, heavy metals
3. Litoměřice Paper and Pulp Mill Pulp, i.e. also AOX, lignin, chlorine compounds
4. Děčín Metalworking, shipyards Metallurgy, including copper, zinc, lead, oils – The Elbe was already heavily polluted at the German-Czech border with industrial, agricultural, and municipal wastewater. (4) (5)
5. VEB Zellstoff- und Papierfabrik Heidenau (Heidenau pulp and paper mill) – pulp production, i.e. also lignosulfonic acids, AOX, chlorine compounds, phenols – The pulp mills discharged their wastewater untreated into the Elbe River – with highly toxic chlorine compounds that were hardly degradable. (3)
6. VEB Chemiewerk Heidenau for paints, varnishes, and solvents, i.e., also VOCs, heavy metals, and solvent residues
7. VEB Gummiwerke Heidenau (tires, rubber products), i.e. also PAH, plasticizers, sulfur compounds
8. SDAG Wismut – Königstein mine Uranium ore mining (in situ leaching with sulfuric acid), i.e. also uranium, radium-226, arsenic, sulfate, heavy metals. The Königstein mine was one of the most dangerous sites because uranium was extracted from the sandstone using sulfuric acid leaching. The contaminated mine water is still being cleaned in a complex process today. (1) (2)
9. VEB Baustoffkombinat Königstein (cement and building materials), i.e. also dust, heavy metals (secondary)
10. VEB Chemical Cleaning Pirna (textile cleaning), i.e. also tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethylene
    

In the 1980s, the Elbe was one of the most polluted rivers in Europe and was considered a toxic “sewer” (25). Parts of it were already biologically dead, with catastrophic oxygen levels and proven toxicity to fish and microorganisms. To this day, I sometimes still carry that foul smell with me in my mind. The combination of the pulp industry, chemical and rubber production, and metal processing led to millions of tons of pollutants, many of which were persistent, bioaccumulative, and naturally toxic.

This means that the enormous double burden on Dresden caused by the Weißeritz and the Elbe rivers was certainly more than real during the GDR era. Looking back, I would even describe it as a toxicological dual-stream system of the GDR era and consider it an enormous burden on Dresden and its citizens.

Let's start rethinking things here and not just ask whether contaminated sites and brownfield sites can still be developed, but what toxic spaces have done to us and our bodies.

And then – 23 years later ...

A new ray of hope for Dresden and a necessary chapter in environmental responsibility

Dresden is renovating Rosenstraße 77 – the former VEB Chemiehandel.

The state capital Dresden is now renovating the former industrial site at Rosenstraße 77, the former headquarters of VEB Chemiehandel. The approximately 15,000 m² site was actively used for industrial purposes from 1962 to 2002, including as a storage and transshipment point for liquid industrial chemicals. The substances delivered there, including tetrachloroethylene (PER), trichloroethylene (TRI), benzine, and other volatile organic compounds (VOCs), were delivered by rail and pumped into 18 underground storage tanks for transshipment and distribution.

For decades, operations were carried out here without adequate safety or environmental standards, resulting in massive contamination of the soil, groundwater, and parts of buildings. As a child, I had often seen these cylindrical wagons, and I can still remember how men stood next to the tank cars without any protection, handling these toxic substances. This means vapors from tetrachloroethylene (PER), trichloroethylene (TRI) and benzine, which are irritating and cytotoxic, may have penetrated their skin and entered their bloodstream directly.

On the other hand, for me this also represents the many things that were left unsaid during the entire GDR era, i.e., the invisibility of countless chemical hazards that were unfortunately part of everyday life back then. People simply accepted it, made it “official” part of everyday life, and many knew nothing about the real dangers, i.e., chemical exposure was depoliticized, trivialized or not publicly named and disclosed. Many lacked any toxicological knowledge, even though we grew up among DDT fields, solvent warehouses and heating oil pits. The official line was often “harmless when used properly.” But what was ‘proper’ when no one knew the substances? What was “harmless” when no one knew what was circulating in the soil, in the air, in our bodies?

The contaminated soil mass documented today at this contaminated site amounts to an estimated 6,000 to 7,500 tons, including mixed fill materials, war debris, and mixed rubble. Of particular concern is the detection of chlorinated hydrocarbons (LHKW), which have migrated into deeper soil layers and into the unconfined groundwater zone. (26)

Flooding hits chemical contamination and (presumably) mobilizes a lot of invisible substances

In August 2002, the site was flooded. At that time, the property was formally ownerless, as the last owner company had effectively ceased operations following liquidation. However, the site was not unused; it continued to be leased and used commercially until then. After the disaster, the state capital Dresden secured the site as part of a substitute performance — it assumed responsibility for hazard prevention but was not yet the legal owner. Looking back, it is not possible to completely reconstruct exactly what was mobilized, distributed, or inhaled during this flood.

A possible scenario and also a possible real danger for the 2002 flood (my own thoughts on this)

• Flooding of the area ➤ Water from the Elbe and Weiße Ritze rivers entered contaminated buildings, soil, tank farms, tracks, and halls. All of these locations were full of PER, TRI, and carbon tetrachloride — without filters or shielding.
• Floating of LHKW ➤ Volatile substances such as PER are water-repellent and rise to the surface.
• Erosion of fine slurries ➤ Contaminated sediments may have been washed out of drains, shafts, or foundation cracks.

• A building with concrete floors, i.e., VOC-emitting surfaces with contaminated floor air - Thermal evaporation afterwards ➤ VOC emissions in the following weeks

The toxic cargo was probably already in circulation before anyone even uttered the word “substitute performance.”

However, one thing is clear: LHKW (volatile halogenated hydrocarbons – these are toxic, carcinogenic, and also mutagenic), heating oil components, PCB-containing materials, and other substances were present in the buildings, floors, tanks and shaft structures (as of today), with a presumably significant potential for diffuse inhalation exposure. Even years after the flood, some of the buildings at Rosenstraße 77 were still rented out, meaning that individual storage and administrative rooms were still in use years later. In the course of more detailed investigations, it was found that VOC levels in the indoor air were significantly above the thresholds permissible under occupational health and safety regulations. The city of Dresden therefore felt compelled to expressly prohibit the remaining tenants from continuing to use the buildings. The exposure situation was considered toxicologically unacceptable, partly because active sources of pollutants with diffuse emissions were identified beneath the floor slabs. Partial renovation or selective repairs were not technically feasible. The complete demolition of the contaminated structures was therefore included in the renovation plans.

In 2023, systematic remediation planning was initiated in close consultation with the Higher Soil Protection Authority in accordance with Saxony's methodology for contaminated sites. These measures include:

• the complete dismantling of contaminated buildings
• the excavation of contaminated soil, especially beneath former floor slabs to a depth of 1.70 m
• Targeted microbiological in-situ remediation of deep-lying LHKV plumes
• groundwater remediation using special injection methods
• Disposal of contaminated materials in accordance with LAGA classification (Z1–Z3)

In line with funding guidelines, part of the site – covering 2,250 m² – will be landscaped to create an ecologically valuable counterbalance. On June 30, 2025, the city of Dresden publicly announced that a total of €4.8 million in funding had been approved for the measures from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and state funds. (26)

For me, this is wonderful news. Rosenstraße 77 was once a place of silent danger, and today it is becoming a symbol that toxic pasts can be transformed rather than suppressed. THANK YOU!

Unfortunately, contaminated sites do not begin with a toxic sample, but rather with the moment of entry.

Let me digress briefly, because many people don't seem to be fully aware of the enormous task that the Free State of Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt have to tackle and overcome when it comes to contaminated sites. I myself follow developments in this area very closely and regularly, because many people (including in my circle of friends and acquaintances) have moved on to “business as usual” after 35 years of German reunification, and no one thinks about it anymore.

But wait ... who really believes that all these highly toxic environmental sins committed during the GDR era and the countless contaminated sites will simply disappear into thin air?

The Free State of Saxony and Saxony-Anhalt must launch well-planned, very complex projects costing millions to billions of euros for redevelopment measures.

I am very grateful for this and would like to take this opportunity to say a big thank you!

A brief look at the legacy of our toxic past

The industrial past of the former East Germany has left behind some dramatic ecological scars in Saxony, i.e., dilapidated plants, tar residues and municipal landfills without sealing have led to polluted soil and contaminated groundwater.

• Since 1990, approximately 9,000 hectares of contaminated sites have been remediated in the Free State of Saxony (42), with an investment volume of around 750 million euros. (41) (as of 2015) Since 2015, Saxony has not only continued remediation work, but has also created new funding structures (42) with targeted pilot projects, innovative microbiological processes, and a clear focus on reuse and environmental relief.
• Another example is the Böhlen site, i.e., a contaminated petrochemical site with overlapping operations. Coal products and petrochemicals have been manufactured at the Böhlen site since the 1920s, resulting in heavy contamination from hydrocarbons, tar, process sludge, and fly ash. This presents a challenge, as some of the remediation measures had to be carried out while modern facilities were still in operation. A high eight-figure sum has already been invested here, meaning that groundwater must continue to be pumped and purified. The pollutants in the soil are considered to be permanently present and, according to the ministry, complete removal is neither financially feasible nor technically possible.
• The Collmberghalde in Dresden-Coschütz. In DIALOG issue 122 (April 2024), Wismut GmbH describes the remediation of the Collmberghalde in Dresden-Coschütz on page 16ff as a technically demanding and ecologically sensitive project. According to Wismut GmbH, the remediation tasks include: Conversion of the Collmberghalde into a safe, publicly accessible recreational area. This involves complex measures such as the removal and relocation of contaminated materials (radioactive coal residues, municipal waste, power plant ash), the application of a radon insulation layer made of power plant ash (approx. 2.5 m thick), flattening and securing the embankments, installing topsoil, creating hiking trails and vegetation, and preventing radon release through soil compaction. And all of this involves remediation challenges such as a variety of materials including uranium ore, pyrite coal, municipal waste, and construction debris, geotechnical risks, i.e., the danger of landslides and unstable embankments, and, of course, the factor of radiation protection, i.e., weekly checks by the environmental measurement department and the goal of complying with the limit values for radon and gamma dose rates. And let's not forget the logistical effort involved, because the remediation is carried out on site (without removal), i.e., rollers, compaction machines, and drainage systems. We should take a look at the costs and schedule here, i.e., total costs of approximately €9 million, division into different construction phases (north side: implementation since December 2023, south side: tendering and approval completed, implementation from 2026 and project duration expected to last until 2028). As a whole, the slag heap is classified by Wismut GmbH as the last mining-related disposal site with radiologically relevant materials in the Dresden city area. It consists of mixed waste deposits from coal and uranium mining residues, household waste, and lignite power plant ash, covering an area of approximately 17 hectares and comprising a volume of around 2.2 million cubic meters. (44) (45)

• Let's also think about Chemnitz-Klaffenbach and Neukirchen, i.e., oil residues and acid resins. Residues from mineral oil production in the GDR were deposited on the site of a refinery in Klaffenbach and in the acid resin ponds in Neukirchen, which meant that 180,000 tons of acid resin had to be disposed of. Remediation costs to date: around 100 million euros → Measures: Removal and replacement of contaminated soil to prevent flooding from the Würschnitz river (as of 2015)
• Let's think about Saxony-Anhalt, where there was also a reality of redevelopment between Altmark, Buna, and Bitterfeld. There was enormous pressure from around 1,000 sites contaminated with toxic waste (as of 2015), mainly from the GDR era. This included soil contaminated by natural gas extraction in the Altmark region, planting on spoil heaps for stabilization in the Mansfeld region, and a necessary investment framework of around €100 million.
• And in case anyone has forgotten, there are also the historic chemical sites such as Bitterfeld, Buna, Leuna, Zeitz and Magdeburg. This means extreme contamination from tar, heavy metals, and organic pollutants such as chlorine compounds (soil replacement and deep remediation are necessary here). The total costs here have already amounted to approximately 800 million euros since the mid-1990s (as of 2015).
• And let's not forget the groundwater – the slowest medium. The GDR era also left serious damage to the groundwater here. Remediation is considered to be a lengthy and costly process, and in extreme cases, measures could take decades or even centuries. Saxony-Anhalt has already invested a total of around 1.3 billion euros (as of 2015) in this area. The latest available figures show that spending on contaminated site remediation in Saxony-Anhalt has already risen to around 1.52 billion euros between 1993 and the end of 2018. (39) In addition, approximately 800 million euros were spent on the remediation of contaminated soil at former industrial sites alone (as of 2020).

What was covered up or ignored back then is now being uncovered bit by bit with scientific know-how and a lot of public commitment. Let's not forget that.

Back to the 2002 flood – what exactly happened? (Excerpts from summer 2002)

• In Dresden, the Friedrichstadt district, the main railway station, and the Friedrichstadt hospital were flooded — all three locations with known areas suspected of contamination. [6] [7]
• The municipal sewage treatment plant in Heidenau was paralyzed by flooding. This resulted in a complete shutdown, meaning that untreated sewage flowed directly into the Elbe River. Both domestic and industrial sewage were affected.
• The (former) VEB Zellstoff- und Papierfabrik Heidenau was not yet completely dismantled in 2002. Storage areas, old settling basins, and contaminated soil were saturated with water — a potential release of AOX, chlorine compounds, and lignosulfonic acids is technically plausible.
• The (former) VEB Chemiewerke Heidenau was also affected. The site was once used to produce paints, varnishes, and solvents — the flooding could have led to the remobilization of VOCs, heavy metals, and solvent residues.
• The Heidenau rubber factory was also located in the flood zone. From today's perspective, its industrial past involving PAHs, plasticizers, and sulfur compounds poses a risk in terms of contaminated sites.
• The Pirna sewage treatment plant was completely shut down due to flooding and power outages. According to official figures, it was one of 32 sewage treatment plants in Saxony that were out of service in 2002, resulting in untreated sewage flowing into the Elbe River.
• Several cleaning companies in Dresden city center were also flooded. This poses a risk of tetrachloroethylene (PER) and trichloroethylene (TRI) being released into the environment. These substances are commonly used in dry cleaning and are now considered carcinogenic.
• In the Seidewitz Valley (Zehistaer Siedlung), the Seidewitz River burst its banks, flooding residential and commercial areas. This probably resulted in mud deposits containing unknown chemical substances, the composition of which remains largely unknown to this day.

What happened in the area surrounding uranium mining in Königstein?

• Since 1967, in-situ leaching has been used at the Königstein uranium mine, a process in which concentrated sulfuric acid is injected into sandstone to dissolve uranium. This created a huge underground reservoir of acid and pollutants, which still has to be pumped out and cleaned up in a controlled manner.

The pit contains, among other things:

• uranium isotopes (U-238, U-234)
• Radium-226
• Arsenic, iron, sulfate, manganese
• pH values < 2 in parts of the lye body

During the floods of 2002, the Elbe River overflowed its banks at Königstein. The slag heaps and shafts of the mine itself were not directly flooded, but there was real concern that:

• hydraulic pressure caused by rising groundwater levels, landslides or drainage flows in mountainous areas, contaminated mine water from the leaching area may have been forced towards the Elbe or into secondary fissures

Wismut GmbH later confirmed that no acute leaks had been recorded, but that safety reserves had been severely depleted. The purification plant had to operate at full capacity to retain contaminated water. [11] [12] [13]

Does the statement “no acute releases” really reassure me? I don't know. Even if the tailings piles were not flooded, slope water pressure waves, seepage flows, and sediment displacement in sensitive areas could have mobilized contaminated fine sludge—especially along tailings pile slopes, drainage paths, or construction joints. No “overflow” was observed (okay), but who can reliably rule out micro-entries via diffuse pathways? There are no publicly available laboratory values for water samples from the immediate vicinity – from precisely the period when the Elbe overflowed.

What did the flood really carry with it?

According to the Federal Institute of Hydrology (BfG) and the International Commission for the Protection of the Elbe River (IKSE), the following pollution levels were recorded at the Magdeburg measuring station (August 16, 2002), with suspended matter load:

1. → 10 times higher than average flow rates, lead (Pb) → 4 times higher concentration than under normal flow conditions, arsenic (As) → 8 times higher, γ-HCH (lindane) → 3 times higher. (14)

These values refer to particulate pollutants, i.e., they were bound to suspended matter that was carried along by the flood wave. (14) The highest concentration of suspended matter occurred before the peak of the flood wave — a typical pattern for flood events. In the floodplains below Magdeburg, millimeter-thick sediments containing these pollutants were deposited, with possible long-term consequences for soil and groundwater.

But what could be behind these abstract pollutant figures, and what could be the possible consequences?

1. Possible acute reactions from contact with contaminated mud or water (e.g., when cleaning up after flooding) can include: skin irritation, respiratory problems (especially with VOCs or lindane), infections from pathogenic germs in mixed water (E. coli, enterococci), absorption of toxic substances through wounds, mucous membranes, or breathing.
2. Possible chronic effects: Lead & arsenic, i.e. possible nerve damage, kidney damage, cancer risks / Lindane (γ-HCH): hormonal disorders, potentially carcinogenic / PAHs & dioxins (in sediments): mutagenic, carcinogenic – particularly critical when absorbed via house dust or food from floodplains / Children & pregnant women particularly at risk due to lower threshold values
3. Possible consequences for animals (especially aquatic fauna), e.g., fish mortality and reproductive decline due to acute oxygen depletion (resulting from organic load) or toxic effects of arsenic, lead, copper (gill damage, kidney damage) / Bioaccumulation, i.e., pollutants accumulate in the tissue of fish and shellfish → enter and spread through food chains (including to humans) / Changes in microorganism communities, e.g., loss of diatoms, benthic invertebrates
4. Possible consequences for the environment and ecosystems, i.e., sediment displacement: toxic fine sludge deposits in floodplains, oxbow lakes, and floodplains — can be reactivated over many years / poisoning of soil organisms: Earthworms, insect larvae, etc. are sensitive to heavy metals → affects food webs / Long-term changes to river dynamics: contaminated sediments alter the chemical and biological self-cleaning capacity of the Elbe / Groundwater risks: PAHs, LHKW and heavy metals can penetrate deeper layers, especially at unsecured contaminated sites
   

The first indoor air quality analyses were conducted in Dresden back in 2003 to assess the impact of the 2002 floods on indoor air quality. Elevated concentrations of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in several flooded basements and ground floors (particularly in poorly dried areas and those close to contaminated sites). Halogenated hydrocarbons such as tetrachloroethylene (PER) and trichloroethylene (TRI) were also particularly noticeable → typical of previous chemical cleaning or contaminated sites, aromatic hydrocarbons such as toluene, xylene, benzene → frequently used in paints, varnishes, oils, and aliphatic hydrocarbons/adhesive residues also occur, e.g., in heating oil residues. In individual cases, peak formaldehyde values were also measured, partly due to moisture-induced degradation of wood-based materials. (15) (16) (17)

Sediment dynamics during extreme floods

During the Elbe floods in August 2002, massive flooding also mobilized large quantities of soil material, suspended matter, and sediments. These originated from riverbeds and riparian areas, contaminated sites, industrial areas, landfills, sewage treatment plants, chemical plants, and mining waste dumps.

The flood wave transported these substances over long distances and deposited them primarily in areas with calm currents, especially in the areas in front of the dykes (floodplains). According to a study by TU Dresden and the DVGW Technology Center Water (Grunewald et al. 2004) (18), the following pollutants were detected in the flood sediments in the floodplain areas around Dresden:

1. Heavy metals: Arsenic (As): up to 60 mg/kg TS, Lead (Pb): up to 300 mg/kg TS, Cadmium (Cd): up to 8 mg/kg TS, Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu), Nickel (Ni): significantly above background values. These metals originate from mining areas (e.g., Ore Mountains, Königstein), the metalworking industry, and contaminated soils, among other sources.
2. Organic pollutants: PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) → e.g. benzo[a]pyrene: up to 1,200 µg/kg TS → Origin: combustion residues, tar, waste oil, railway operations, PCB (polychlorinated biphenyls) → up to 500 µg/kg TS → origin: transformers, paints, industrial waste, DDT & metabolites (DDE, DDD) → up to 300 µg/kg TS → origin: Contaminated sites from the pesticide Lindane (γ-HCH) → detected in isolated cases, mainly from Czech sources (19) (20)
3. Spatial distribution and hotspots of deposition: The highest concentrations were found in the forelands between Pirna and Radebeul, floodplains near Heidenau, Laubegast, Übigau, sedimentation zones at the Marienbrücke bridge and in the Ostragehege, and Elbe meadows with backwater zones (e.g., Kaditz, Zschieren). Sediment layers 2–10 cm thick were documented there, i.e., with a fine-grained, dark gray to black consistency, often with oily odors and anthropogenic inclusions (plastic, soot, glass).
4. Ecological and health relevance: In many samples, the action values of the Federal Soil Protection Ordinance (BBodSchV) were exceeded, especially for arsenic, lead, benzo[a]pyrene, and PCBs. Plant availability: At low pH values (< 6), increased mobility of heavy metals → risk for forage plants, in terms of bioavailability: PAHs and PCBs can enter food chains (e.g., via earthworms, small mammals) and long-term risk: In the event of renewed flooding, there is a risk of remobilization of these sediments (19) (20).

But what about air pollution after such flooding?

While the focus is often on the water and the soil, air pollution may not receive sufficient attention, as the atmosphere is an important vector for pollutants, especially in the days and weeks after the water recedes.

Inhalation exposure during flooding events

After flooding, not only sludge, sediment, and pollutants enter homes and streets, but the air also becomes a carrier of toxic and biologically active substances.

Of course, we also wondered what else had been thrown into the air by the flood.

1. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) from evaporation from damp soil, basements, furniture? (Tetrachloroethylene (PER), trichloroethylene (TRI), benzene, toluene, xylene, aliphatic hydrocarbons from heating oil)?

2. Secondary VOC sources through chemical reactions, i.e., ozone reactions with VOCs, e.g., from heating oil, paints, adhesives—possible secondary organic aerosols? These are fine particles, respirable, and more chemically reactive than the source materials. This would be particularly relevant in warm late summer periods after flooding.

3. Microbiological aerosols and endotoxins from sludge, mixed water overflows, flooded sewage treatment plants, mold spores, contaminated sediments? This also means possible bacteria such as Escherichia coli, enterococci = diarrhea, infections, sepsis in vulnerable groups, mold spores (Aspergillus spp.) = allergies, asthma, invasive mycoses, endotoxins (bacterial cell walls) = immunomodulatory, pro-inflammatory, or even Legionella (in stagnation zones).

4. Decomposition processes in basements also mean methane, ammonia, H₂S = foul-smelling, toxic to the respiratory tract

5. Electrical fires, workshops also mean dioxins and PAHs = toxic, carcinogenic

6. Renovation work also means formaldehyde and solvents = irritating, sensitizing

7. Fine dust with pollutant load from the drying of flood sediments? This also means dust swirling and possible contamination with heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, cadmium, or PAHs and PCBs. Particles that can enter the lungs and have a potentially toxic effect, particularly dangerous for children, the elderly, emergency workers, and other vulnerable groups.

8. Asbestos and fiber release from damaged old buildings? In flooded buildings with GDR building materials, e.g., Eternit panels, asbestos-containing plaster, and seals, fiber release may occur during drying and renovation. To my knowledge, there has been no systematic recording of this after 2002, but it would be a relevant risk for helpers and residents.

9. What about fire gases and pyrolysis products? Short circuits in transformer stations, fires in basements or workshops also release polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), dioxins, and chlorine compounds. These can attach themselves to fine dust or enter the indoor air as gaseous toxins.

10. What about biogenic gases and odorous substances? Methane, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide from decomposition processes in flooded basements, sewage treatment plants, or animal husbandry. In addition to causing unpleasant odors, these substances are also toxicologically relevant, especially at high concentrations in poorly ventilated rooms.

After flooding events, a toxicological air pathway catalog is also required, i.e., early warning systems, remediation guidelines, protection concepts for emergency services and appropriate long-term monitoring.

Reflection Room – What should future risk and disaster management plans consider?

“Shouldn't we perhaps ...”

• …  after catastrophic events, more accurately record the physical, inhalation, and emotional stress to which volunteers and emergency personnel were exposed, e.g., through contact with contaminated mud, mixed water, waste oil, or industrial residues.
• ... Establish a permanent, interdisciplinary, Europe-wide networked platform that jointly considers toxic legacy sites, air pathways, genetic vulnerability, psychosocial consequences and long-term exposure?
• ... Consider that, if based on “average people” in current models, legacy assessments will no longer be appropriate or sufficient in 2025 (with more than 400 million people now affected by long COVID and ME/CFS, rapidly increasing cancer cases, and many other chronic diseases). By 2033, more than 1 billion people are expected to be affected by long Covid. There is an urgent need for rethinking and action here.
• ... Consider adjusting remediation targets, as thresholds are often based on “acceptable risks” rather than genetically sensitive individuals (which also affects those with long COVID and ME/CFS).
•  ... Expand PFAS mapping projects as a systematic research network (not just selective surveys) or, for example, extend projects such as GLOBALTOX (H2020) to include human exposure and air pathways? This means looking at contaminated sites, air pollution, sediments, VOCs, pesticides, heavy metals, and solvents together, systematically recording exposure histories (e.g., from the former GDR, industrial areas, flood regions), etc. Although many pieces of the puzzle are already in place, there is no European umbrella organization that researches, documents, and translates the toxic past, molecular present and health future into effective policy.
• ... Question why protective clothing (e.g., respiratory protection, skin barriers, full-body protection) is often not available or only available in inadequate quantities for civilian operations, even though contact with hazardous substances occurs over several days?
• … systematically evaluate what types of skin irritation, respiratory problems, allergic reactions, or fatigue syndromes occur in emergency responders after extreme flood or fire operations?
• … Identify potential VOC hotspots early on, e.g., flooded old buildings, basement areas with wood-based materials, locations near contaminated sites, or low-lying areas near rivers with poor air circulation.
• … Recognize musty chemical odors in damp basements as a warning sign of outgassing pollutants (e.g., tetrachloroethylene, heating oil residues, VOC mixtures) and document them systematically?
• … In future, will toxicological assessments also be carried out on back diffusion from groundwater into basement or indoor air, particularly in buildings located near contaminated soil?
• … Increased cleaning, gutting, drying and remediation (under controlled conditions), i.e., also with accompanying air analysis and fine dust measurement in the event of sediment contamination?
• … Establish comprehensive fine dust measurements to reveal the potential pollutant load in dried sludge dust (heavy metals, PAHs, PCBs), especially in contaminated indoor spaces?
• … clearly define the responsibilities of environmental, health, and disaster control authorities—in order to jointly assess toxicological emergencies during extreme weather events at an early stage? How can we ensure that this cooperation actually has a preventive effect and does not only come into play after a disaster has occurred?
• … Should we view toxic long-term effects not only as a medical issue, but also as part of psychosocial support, especially for people with olfactory trauma who still suffer from intense smell memories years later? Should we gain a better understanding of how many of these stresses have psychological after-effects – via smell, trauma, the inability to breathe? Shouldn't we conduct more research into the psychological consequences of toxic exposure, especially olfactory trauma triggered by smells such as oil, chemicals, or decay? How can we help those affected who are reminded of the disaster by these smells and suffer long-term psychological stress as a result?
• … Systematically integrate VOC surveys, air quality protocols, and sediment analyses into a publicly accessible, GIS-linked register?
• … Include explicit toxicological air pathways in all flood prevention measures, i.e., just as a matter of course as water level models and evacuation plans?
• … Inform the population transparently about the results of air and pollutant measurements, i.e., in a comprehensible manner, preventively and with recommendations for action for affected households?
• … Set up epidemiological follow-up studies to obtain systematic health data from symptomatic feedback, e.g., on respiratory infections, neurological complaints or MCS symptoms after flooding?
• … Recognize that after water comes air, and with it many invisible substances that penetrate deep into bodies, spaces and memories?
• … Systematically detect VOC hotspots after flooding, for example, in damp basements, old buildings, or neighborhoods adjacent to contaminated sites? How can we ensure that damp basements, old buildings with wood-based materials, and locations near contaminated sites are monitored for toxic substances before they are inhabited or used again? What technologies and measurement methods could help to detect VOC pollution quickly and accurately in order to protect affected households?
• … Should comprehensive toxicological assessments be commissioned not only on a selective basis, but also be made mandatory as part of the follow-up measures after every disaster?
• … Should we perhaps establish comprehensive toxicological assessments as an integral part of every disaster response in order to identify all relevant pollutant pathways? How can we ensure that these assessments are not just carried out selectively, but across the board and on a long-term basis? What institutional structures and funding would be necessary to establish toxicological follow-up care as standard practice?
• … Shouldn't we develop early warning systems that detect not only hydrological risks but also toxicological air and sediment pollution? How can we ensure that these systems also take into account molecular residual effects such as VOC emissions or heavy metal displacement?
• … Creating formats, memorial plaques, archives, maps with which places of historical significance can be documented globally and made accessible to the public?
• … think about how toxic knowledge from the past can influence our current strategies for climate impact resilience?
• ... Consider that, if based on “average people” in current models, legacy assessments will no longer be appropriate or sufficient in 2025 (with more than 400 million people now affected by long COVID and ME/CFS, rapidly increasing cancer cases, and many other chronic diseases). By 2033, more than 1 billion people are expected to be affected by long Covid. There is an urgent need for rethinking and action here.
• … draw on the knowledge that toxic knowledge must not remain in the archives, but must truly change our actions here and now?
• … Take a closer look at how many former pesticide storage sites from the GDR remain undiscovered or unremediated to this day – in barns, depots, spray storage facilities, fields and meadows?
• … ask why pesticide inputs via rivers, groundwater, and dust transport have hardly been linked to contaminated site research to date?
• … conduct extensive tests to determine whether floodwaters have reactivated pesticide residues that had been deposited in the soil and washed them into inhabited areas?
• … Determine how many people have been unknowingly inhaling spray mist, drift, and VOCs from pesticides over decades—especially in residential areas?
• … Talk about what it means for our bodies when pesticides are combined with solvents, e.g., in carriers, adhesives, or as VOC mixtures.
• … Involve the population's “invisible pesticide knowledge” more, i.e., memories of aircraft (which sometimes dropped their cargo without regard for walkers/hikers), helicopters, oily smells in fields, watery eyes during walks — in order to locate some undiscovered sites even faster?
• … Think together about how knowledge about the consequences of pesticides can be communicated sensitively but clearly — especially in agriculture itself?
• … Should we discuss historical pesticide residues more intensively as a possible factor in autoimmune, neurological, or hormone-triggered diseases?

• … Understanding dry weather periods as potential amplifiers of pollutant concentrations in soil and groundwater and systematically recording them?
• … Ask whether the increasing VOC emissions in hot weather are adequately taken into account in air quality models and renovation plans.
• … investigate how dried contaminated soils and flood sediments become sources of fine dust that transport toxic particles when exposed to wind?
• … Check whether dry periods can lead to a resurgence of pollutants through capillary transport, e.g., in the case of volatile substances.
• … Consider that dry basements and floor slabs can become entry points for VOCs when back diffusion from contaminated subsoil increases?
• … Consider the long-term risk that arises when falling groundwater levels no longer retain pollutants but instead mobilize them?
• … understand that the combination of legacy pollution, urban sealing, and dry periods creates new forms of urban pollutant circulation?
• … Record more frequently in which weeks VOC-contaminated air samples – for example, in old buildings – correlate with heat?
• … Introduce “dry weather-sensitive environmental monitoring” for every city with areas of contaminated land – as a proactive and protective measure?

What was the weather situation in Dresden at that time?

The flooding was triggered by a so-called Vb low-pressure system that moved from the Mediterranean Sea across Hungary to Poland. On its western flank, moist air masses accumulated in the Ore Mountains, resulting in extreme rainfall in eastern Saxony. The headwaters of the Weißeritz (Zinnwald-Georgenfeld) were particularly affected, where 312 mm of rain fell within just 24 hours on August 12, 2002, a German record. (24) It continued to rain on August 11 and 13, with a total of over 400 mm falling in Zinnwald in three days.

• Humidity: very high throughout (80–90%), which greatly increased physical exertion (especially during rescue operations).
• Wind: mostly light to moderate, but the high humidity made the air feel “sticky.”
• Intense smell of oil, decay, and chemicals, especially after the water recedes.

After the flood receded on August 18, 2002, a phase began that was perhaps unspectacular from a meteorological point of view, but certainly highly relevant from a toxicological perspective, as the weather favored the evaporation, drying out, and stirring up of pollutants from sediments, soils, and buildings.

August 18–31, 2002: Daily highs mostly between 22°C and 26°C, precipitation: hardly any, i.e. many dry and sunny days, humidity remaining high (70–85%), but decreasing, wind weak to moderate, i.e. hardly any ventilation in confined urban areas.

September 1–15, 2002: Late summer weather continued, with dry, warm days and plenty of sunshine and hardly any rain, which accelerated the drying of flood sediments.

Possible consequences for air quality and pollutant behavior

1. Evaporation of volatile substances (VOCs), e.g., heating oil residues, solvents, cleaning agents from flooded basements evaporated when heated → increased VOC concentrations in the indoor air

2. Secondary VOC sources through chemical reactions caused by ozone reactions with VOCs, e.g., from heating oil, paints, adhesives – secondary organic aerosols (SOA)?

• These are finely particulate, respirable, and more chemically reactive than the source materials.
• Particularly relevant in warm late summer periods after flooding, e.g., September 2002.

2. Fine dust and sediment, e.g., from dry flood sediments in yards, streets, and floodplains, were not removed everywhere. Wind or movements, e.g., cleanup work, caused dust to be stirred up, presumably containing PAHs, PCBs, heavy metals (lead, arsenic, cadmium), microbial residues from feces, and mixed water.

3. Odor pollution and psychological effects, i.e., a pungent, oily, and foul odor that lingered in the air for weeks.

Chronicle of toxicological follow-up care 2002–2022

2002–2003: Acute phase & initial measurements

• Ad hoc sampling by TU Dresden, BfG, UFZ Leipzig, DVGW-TZW Karlsruhe (31)
• Proven substances: PCB, PAH, DDT, heavy metals (As, Pb, Cd, Hg), mineral oils, MTBE, VOC (e.g. tetrachloroethylene, benzene)
• Indoor air measurements: VOC pollution in flooded basements (primarily in Dresden, Bitterfeld, Coswig)
• Was there a systematic recording and comprehensive toxicological assessment carried out at the time?

2004–2006: Research projects & first specialist publications

BMBF funding line “Sustainable Flood Management” (30)

• BMBF funding line “Sustainable Flood Management” → Projects: RiskMap, Elbe2002, SedNet → Focus: Sediment mobilization, pollutant transport, risk communication
• VOC studies: TU Dresden & TZW Karlsruhe confirm increased indoor pollution in old buildings

2007–2012: Transition to the risk perspective

Introduction of the EU Flood Risk Management Directive (FRMD) → Focus on hazard maps, but without toxicological dimension. The EU Directive came into force in 2007. Contaminated sites were not systematically integrated into hazard maps. Studies by GKSS and BfG confirm persistent sediment contamination. (28) (29)

• Contaminated sites register & GIS: No integration into flood risk planning
• Sediment studies: GKSS & BfG reveal persistent contamination in floodplains (e.g., Wittenberge, Friedrichstadt)
• Communication: Results remain largely within expert circles

2013: Elbe flooding & repetition of patterns

• Renewed mobilization of contaminated sediments (e.g., Coswig, Bitterfeld, Dresden). Sediment mobilization occurred again. VOC surveys were not carried out systematically. Criticism of the lack of toxicological precautions has been documented in expert circles. (21)
• Has a systematic VOC survey been carried out here for already known risks?
• Early warning systems for toxic substances? Integration of contaminated sites into hazard maps? Health care for emergency workers and first responders?

2014–2020: selective progress and outstanding issues

• Individual studies (e.g., UFZ, BfG) exist, but no comprehensive assessment has been conducted. No epidemiological follow-up has been documented. GIS mapping of toxic pathways?
• Epidemiological follow-ups? E.g., asthma, skin diseases, VOC exposure
• Digital flood atlases are being created – but without chemical substance pathways
• Contaminated sites remain “blind spots” in flood prevention measures

2022–2025: There is no publicly documented toxicological GIS mapping or early warning system for VOCs/particulate matter. The demands made in the specialist literature are well documented. (21) (22) (23)

• GIS-supported contaminated site map with chemical and toxicological classification? This refers to an interdisciplinary, toxicological, and expanded GIS system that integrates hydrological, chemical, and atmospheric data. Why is this important? To show what can be mobilized in the event of flooding. A historical contaminated site map also adds value by bringing hidden knowledge back into the discourse.
• Hydrochemical model for substance displacement? Where do pollutants migrate at level xyz, i.e., simulation of substance displacement through water pathways?
• Systematic recording of fine dust pollution caused by flood sediments
• Comprehensive VOC measurements in indoor spaces?
• Early warning systems/air dispersion models for VOCs and particulate matter for VOCs, heavy metals, particulate matter? Who should be warned early in the event of evaporation or dust swirling, and who is affected? Where do pollutants evaporate in heat/wind?
• Interdisciplinary early warning systems: Real-time linking with weather data (wind, temperature)? Enables toxicological early warning!
• Systematic aftercare for helpers and emergency personnel?
• Integration of legacy issues into HWRM plans?

• Air and sediment models for chemical pathways?
• Protective measures for first responders and emergency personnel with regard to inhalation exposure?
• Toxicological assessments of remediation work, e.g., asbestos, PCB-containing paints
• Citizen-friendly visualization and overlay, e.g., for schools, universities, nursing homes, long COVID, MCS, and ME/CFS networks, cancer patients, other chronic diseases? Why it's valuable: Makes abstract danger concrete and actionable. Who is at risk, where, and how — not in abstract terms, but in a realistic way.

I consider all these points to be necessary additions to civil protection.

The floods of 2002 were not only a major hydrological event, but also a major toxicological event. Many contaminated sites along the Elbe were flooded without having been completely remediated or secured beforehand. The material contamination caused by the flood wave was measurable, but many long-term effects remained unclear.

I am currently working on these topics in my book "Ahrtal Relearn. A 360-degree learning and reflection space for resilience, responsibility, and collective learning across society as a whole. How we can use the 2021 Ahr Valley disaster to create a necessary global learning ecosystem for everyone. It is scheduled to be published in German in summer 2025 (English version already planned).

What would another flood deployment mean for me in the future?

1. I already have a very high susceptibility to environmental toxins: GST deletion (glutathione S-transferases): → This means that my body can no longer adequately detoxify certain toxic metabolites, such as benzene, formaldehyde, and pesticide residues.
2. NAT2 Ultra Slow (N-Acetyltransferase Type II): → Increased accumulation of toxic intermediate products, especially when in contact with aromatic amines, diesel exhaust fumes, pyrolysis products.
3. Multiple enzyme dysregulation (phases I–III) and multiple toxicogenetic vulnerability (also in relation to medications with potentially life-threatening consequences, i.e., emergency medical services/intensive care/emergency room)
4. Any exposure, whether to VOCs, fine dust, mold, or oil-containing substances, can trigger not only irritation symptoms but also lasting, severe systemic reactions in me. (Unfortunately, this has happened several times already.)
5. Nowadays, even the lowest concentrations of pollutants cause me to suffer from breathing difficulties, cardiovascular reactions, and extremely limited ability to recover — MCS (multiple chemical sensitivity) is unfortunately not a trivial matter, but a chronic toxic syndrome that can become worse with each subsequent exposure. Repeated exposure could lead to irreversible long-term damage and possibly even be life-threatening.

My prevention kit looks a little different from what is described in conventional checklists—I have long since had to adapt it to my circumstances (which are not of my own making), but unfortunately, many millions of people affected by long COVID and ME/CFS have certainly not yet done so.

I'm not really sure if everyone truly understands what this ultimately means for us as those affected—and I'm talking about millions of people (and the number is growing every day). This is no longer about protecting ourselves with masks and staying away from places with high levels of pollutants, developing intensive and sophisticated prevention strategies, and having a HEPA filter in every room. No, it's also about no longer being able to tolerate medications and vaccines, about reacting to even the smallest amounts with severe DDIs and having to fight for your life multiple times. I myself, on my own initiative and at my own expense, had extensive PGx and gene analyses carried out to understand why I react so severely and unexpectedly. And yes, they brought the extent of it to light ...

Unfortunately, however, many of the millions of people affected (including emergency services personnel!) are not yet aware of this, and emergency management and disaster control are NOT equipped or prepared for this.

6. I am exposed to additional risks due to helper conditions if no comprehensive VOC measurements are carried out, protective equipment is inadequate, and there are sources of pollutants such as heating oils, organochlorine solvents, mold toxins, asbestos-containing building materials, and much more.

Own representation

And it is precisely this point that I would like to address here as one of the (actually) most pressing but unfortunately least considered issues in civil protection.

What does Long Covid, ME/CFS, and MCS mean for the ability of millions of people to work, especially for emergency services, police, firefighters, the military, emergency management, and disaster control — even though they have played key roles in emergency organizations for decades?

What happens when large numbers of civilians are no longer fit for work due to long COVID, ME/CFS, MCS, rapidly increasing rates of cancer, type 2 diabetes, orthostatic hypotension, cardiovascular disease, or myopia?

Operational readiness in the 21st century – reimagined

The facts are clear

• According to recent modeling, over 1.5 million people in Germany alone are living with long COVID or ME/CFS (32).
• The social costs of these diseases amount to over €250 billion (2020–2024) – equivalent to around 1.5% of GDP (32).
• Studies by Charité and the Max Delbrück Center show that ME/CFS after Long Covid can persist for over 20 months, with massive limitations in physical capacity (33).
• The disorders are associated with exercise intolerance, cognitive impairments, drug intolerances, and multisystemic disorders (34) (35).
• Long COVID is now one of the most common diseases worldwide. Already 400 million people are affected, and the economic burden is now estimated at around US$1 trillion annually (36) (37). According to forecasts, the number of people affected could rise to more than one billion by 2033, with the majority of those affected coming from economically active age groups. The impact on the economy is enormous and poses a serious social challenge (38).
• And one of the most important points is currently not being considered or is being considered insufficiently.: the loss of smell due to COVID, Long COVID or medication is not only a personal limitation, but can also be life-threatening in disaster situations. Especially in floods, fires, or when hazardous substances are released, the sense of smell is often the first warning system that signals danger. This is particularly critical for emergency services, nursing staff, and volunteers. What does this mean for the perception of contaminated sites in particular? Many contaminated substances such as benzene, toluene, chlorine, hydrogen sulfide, tar, oil, and mold are detectable by smell. The sense of smell has been a low-threshold warning instrument, especially for laypeople and citizens. When the sense of smell is lost, this protective function is lost – toxic locations are no longer recognized, even though they are dangerous, i.e., there is a delayed or no reaction to toxic substances. After floods, microbiological processes occur, e.g., decay, mold, fermentation – often detectable by smell. Fires on contaminated sites release toxic gases that would be identifiable by smell. Those who cannot smell cannot recognize the danger posed by smoke, vapors or contaminated sediments. I have created a separate section for this
• For the latter reason in particular, we must place top priority in this area on comprehensive sensor-based warning systems for VOCs, CO, radon, mold spores, wearables for people who cannot smell with vibration or light alarms, practical and well-communicated checklists for visual and physical warning signs, e.g. headaches, mucous membrane irritation, floor discoloration, and place odor insensitivity as a risk factor at the top of the agenda in renovation planning and citizen participation. There are so many possibilities here, we just have to do it, e.g., storytelling workshops for those affected: How do you live in a toxic environment without warning systems? I am currently working on a concept for integrating sensory impairments into disaster and emergency management, elite special forces and military deployment strategies as a strategic factor and tactile variable – further development of combat readiness strategies / model for assessing the impact of readiness decisions – adaptation to the “local first, federal last” approach – assessment of social structures as a resilience factor / new mechanisms for the IPDS model.
  

Unfortunately, the answer is sobering, because so far this has hardly been systematically planned. And that is precisely why I developed innovative 360-degree approaches and presented them in May 2025 at the Homeland Security and Emergency Management Summit 2025 (ERAU, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University).

And what would that mean for me personally?

I would no longer be able to justify participating in flood relief efforts. Not out of fear, but based on purely rational medical considerations. Unfortunately, this is no longer a matter of “sensitivity,” but of genuine, documented metabolic deficiencies, severe intolerances to medications with potentially life-threatening DDIs (side effects), and an already severely manifest chronic multisystemic disease.

What does this mean for emergency services?

• Police, fire department, armed forces, THW (Federal Agency for Technical Relief), emergency services, disaster control—they all depend on people who are physically fit, medically treatable, and stress-resistant.
• But what if these very abilities are impaired by post-infectious multisystem diseases?
• What if toxic exposures, vaccine reactions, or drug interactions lead to relapses and severe side effects in those affected?
• And what if pacing, stimulus shielding, and exposure avoidance suddenly became part of operational planning?

Operational readiness is more than physical presence — it also involves strategic thinking, system analysis, and future architecture.

What I can offer you instead

• A clear, well-organized, and calm mind — combined with strategic thinking in a 360° approach and a keen eye for interdisciplinary connections

Qualifications and specialization:

• Graduate Disaster Manager (WAW) (Final Grade: Very Good)
• Certified Crisis Communicator (350 hours) (Final Grade: Very Good)
• Certified Risk and Crisis Management (350 hours) (Final Grade: Very Good)
• Certified Marketing Manager (DAM) (Final Grade: Excellent)
• Certified Social Media PR Manager (Final Grade: Very Good)
• Active member of Prof. Eric Chan's pharmacokinetic community (NUS Singapore) – I contribute my own case studies with analyses, the development of relevant ecosystems, and analytical contributions from the scientific community.
• ERAU (Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Worldwide College of Arts & Sciences) "Combatting Human Trafficking" Badge (Verified: 11.02.2025)
• Trainingsprogramm of the Insitute for Social Capital "Disaster & Emergency Management and Social Capital"
• Since 5/2025, I have also been an active member of the IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society (GRSS) – an international professional society within the IEEE dedicated to Earth observation, remote sensing, and geoscience data analysis. For me, the combination of remote sensing, environmental analysis, and healthcare is not a topic for the future – it is a necessary step for modern civil protection.
• Certified nutritionist
• Membership: International Social Capital Association Incorporated
• 26 years of professional experience, including as a strategic consultant and coach with a focus on marketing and crisis strategy, health communication, and prevention (owner of “MehrLot Digital” (2016–2022) Development, planning, and implementation of strategies and concepts for sustainable positioning, communication, and visibility on the internet - Strategic consulting and coaching - Specialist research and analysis, data protection and handling of issues relevant to business protection - Development of agenda-setting strategies, development and implementation of new communication strategies in change processes (acceptance communication), support and collaboration in the implementation of a social engineering project)

Development and maintenance of a comprehensive website, “University of Hope” www.präventionsschütztleben.de, featuring practical prevention strategies and forward-looking topics such as:

• Immersive AR training for emergency services
• Preventive medicine strategies based on pharmacokinetics/genetics (PGx)
• Holistic approaches to dealing with Long Covid, ME/CFS, and toxic exposures

On May 8, 2025, I had the honor of serving as a speaker at the Pracademic Emergency Management and Homeland Security Summit 2025, hosted by Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University – Embry-Riddle Worldwide College of Arts & Sciences | Department of Emergency, Disaster and Global Security Studies. My presentation, titled “When your life is on the line, optimized and comprehensive training, as well as the development of holistic 360-degree approaches, is everything. Well-Prepared for Emergencies – A balance between high-tech innovation and human care,” allowed me to share my latest and innovative prevention strategies tailored for emergency responders. This global academic summit welcomed 350 participants from 27 countries, bringing together an inspiring community of scholars, educators, emergency management professionals, homeland security experts, and policy-makers. It was a wonderful blend of expertise and dedication, unified by one shared mission: to make our world a better and safer place while fostering cooperative solutions. A heartfelt thank you goes not only to the academic committee of Embry-Riddle / Embry-Riddle Worldwide College of Arts & Sciences, but also to all co-presenters from around the world and, of course, to the summit attendees for the inspiring exchange of ideas, which brought true added value. I am deeply convinced that with all of these wonderful insights and approaches, we can shape a more resilient future – globally.

“Safety is not a state, but a process. Every step, every idea, and every collaboration shapes our future.”

And don't worry – I definitely won't get bored.

Because there is still much to do. For all of us.

What we should tackle together now:

• Development of hybrid training models and simulation-based wargaming approaches for complex operational situations
• Building resilient social capital structures and municipal networks
• Design of customized tabletop exercises & EOC-supported simulation games
• Further development of reliable warning apps and sustainable crisis communication
• IIntegration of PGx, genetic risk research & exposure monitoring
• Adaptation of the IPDS model to new operational requirements
• Development of an advanced GIS for environmental analysis and real-time risk mapping

Bibliography and list of sources (accessed on July 1, 2025)

(1) TAG24. (2021, 9. Dezember). Tschüss Uran-Abbau: Die letzte strahlende Fuhre geht in die USA. https://www.tag24.de/sachsen/tschuess-uran-abbau-die-letzte-strahlende-fuhre-geht-in-die-usa-1986245

(2) Wismut GmbH. (2017). Sanierung des Uranbergbaus in Sachsen – Stand und Perspektiven. Berg- und Hüttenmännische Monatshefte, 162(11), 478–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00501-017-0643-2.

(3) Bing. (2025). Zellstoffwerke DDR Firmen Elbe Schadstoffe. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Zellstoffwerke+DDR+Firmen+Elbe+Schadstoffe&toWww=1&redig=D6F5FA20E440452292FBA764990D743E

(4) FS-Journal. (o. J.). Schadstoffe in der Elbe – Messprogramm von der Quelle bis zur Mündung. https://fs-journal.de/forschung-und-entwicklung/schadstoffe-in-der-elbe-messprogramm-von-der-quelle-bis-zur-muendung/ 

(5) Umweltbundesamt. (2024). Schadstoffbericht 2024 – Textteil und Steckbriefe 2024_Schadstoffbericht_Textteil_und_Steckbriefe.pdf

(6) Landeshauptstadt Dresden. (2003). Elbehochwasser 2002 – Dokumentation, Elbehochwasser2002.pdf

(7) Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde (BfG). (2002). Das Sommerhochwasser 2002 im Elbegebiet – Stoffliche Belastung. https://undine.bafg.de/elbe/extremereignisse/elbe_hw2002.html

(8) Hübler, M. (2014). Altlasten und Hochwasser – ein unterschätztes Risiko? In M. Hübler (Hrsg.), Altlasten – Risiken erkennen und bewältigen (S. 123–140). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-658-06173-9_6.

(9) Verband Wohneigentum Sachsen e. V. (o. J.). Rückblick Hochwasser Pirna 2002. https://www.verband-wohneigentum.de/sv-pirna1/on57393.

(10) Wikipedia. (2025). Hochwasser in Mitteleuropa 2002.  https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hochwasser_in_Mitteleuropa_2002.

(11) Internationale Kommission zum Schutz der Elbe (IKSE). (2003). Dokumentation des Hochwassers vom August 2002 im Elbegebiet [Printausgabe].

(12) Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde (BfG). (2003). Stoffliche Belastung der Elbe durch das Hochwasser 2002 [Printausgabe].

(13) Wismut GmbH. (2005). Sanierungsbericht Königstein 2002–2005 [nicht online verfügbar, in Fachbibliotheken einsehbar].

(14) Bundesanstalt für Gewässerkunde (BfG). (2002). Das Sommerhochwasser 2002 im Elbegebiet – Stoffliche Belastung. https://undine.bafg.de/elbe/extremereignisse/elbe_hw2002.html.

(15) AGÖF. (2006). VOC-Datenbank [interne Datenbank, nicht öffentlich zugänglich].

(16) Umweltbundesamt & AGÖF. (2004). Orientierungswerte für VOC in Innenräumen [Printveröffentlichung].

(17) Stadt Dresden. (2003). Interne Berichte zur Raumluftqualität in überfluteten Gebäuden [nicht öffentlich zugänglich, in Fachkreisen zitiert].

(18) Grunewald, K., Unger, C., Brauch, H.-J., & Schmidt, W. (2004). Elbehochwasser 2002 – Schadstoffbelastung von Schlamm- und Sedimentproben im Raum Dresden. UWSF – Umweltchemie und Ökotoxikologie, 16(1), 7–14. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Karsten-Grunewald/publication/240953387_Elbe_flood_2002_in_Retrospect_Pollution_of_sectiments_due_to_the_extreme_flood_situation_around_Dresden_Saxony_Germany_Schadstoffbelastung_von_Schlamm-_und_Sedimentproben_im_Raum_Dresden_Sachsen/links/00b4952170f0966a94000000/Elbe-flood-2002-in-Retrospect-Pollution-of-sectiments-due-to-the-extreme-flood-situation-around-Dresden-Saxony-Germany-Schadstoffbelastung-von-Schlamm-und-Sedimentproben-im-Raum-Dresden-Sachsen.pdf.

(19) Universität Hamburg. (2015). Fachstudie Elbauenböden – ELSA-Projekt. https://elsa-elbe.de/massnahmen/fachstudien-neu/fachstudie-elbauenboeden.html.

(20) Umweltbundesamt. (2003). Stoffliche Belastung der Elbe durch das Hochwasser 2002 [Printveröffentlichung].

(21) Hübler, M. (2022). Altlasten und toxikologische Risiken bei Extremhochwasser. In M. Hübler (Hrsg.), Umweltgefahren im Klimawandel (S. 211–230). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-658-46760-9_9 

(22) Hübler, M. (2020). Altlastenmanagement und Bevölkerungsschutz. In M. Hübler (Hrsg.), Umweltmedizin im Einsatz (S. 33–52). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-658-26743-8_2

(23) Landeshauptstadt Dresden. (2022, 12. Dezember). Pressemitteilung: 20 Jahre nach dem Hochwasser 2002. https://www.dresden.de/de/rathaus/aktuelles/pressemitteilungen/2022/12/pm_036.php?pk_kwd=news.

(24) Kachelmannwetter. (2017). Vor 15 Jahren: Hochwasser der Elbe. https://wetterkanal.kachelmannwetter.com/vor-15-jahren-hochwasser-der-elbe/

(25) Der Spiegel. (1981, 25. Mai). Die Elbe ist meilenweit biologisch tot [Spiegel-Ausgabe Nr. 22]. Der Spiegel schrieb 1981: > „Die Elbe ist meilenweit biologisch tot: Fische mit Schwermetallen vergiftet, dürfen nicht mehr in den Handel, tonnenweise krepieren sie wegen Sauerstoffmangels im Fluss. […] Proteste gegen den Dreck in der ‚Kloake der Industrie‘ bewirken wenig.“ https://www.altezeitschriften.de/der-spiegel/230-der-spiegel-nr22-25-mai-1981.html

(26) Landeshauptstadt Dresden. (2025, 30. Juni). Pressemitteilung: 4,8 Mio. Euro Fördermittel für Sanierung Rosenstraße 77. https://www.dresden.de/de/rathaus/aktuelles/pressemitteilungen/06/pm_096.php

(27) Landeshauptstadt Dresden. (2025). Sanierungsprojekt Rosenstraße 77. https://www.dresden.de/de/stadtraum/umwelt/umwelt/boden/altlasten/sanierung-rosenstrasse77.php

(28) Bundesministerium für Umwelt. (2009). Richtlinie zum Management von Hochwasserrisiken (PDF-Dokument:  richtlinie_management_hochwasserrisiken.pdf)

(29) Wikipedia. (2025). Richtlinie 2007/60/EG über die Bewertung und das Management von Hochwasserrisiken. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richtlinie_2007/60/EG_%C3%BCber_die_Bewertung_und_das_Management_von_Hochwasserrisiken

(30) Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF). (2025). Nachhaltiges Wassermanagement – Forschung für Nachhaltigkeit. https://www.bmbf.de/DE/Forschung/EnergieKlimaUndNachhaltigkeit/ForschungFuerNachhaltigkeit/NachhaltigesWassermanagement/nachhaltigeswassermanagement_node.html

(31) Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung (UFZ). (2025). Forschung zu Altlasten & Hochwasserfolgen. https://www.ufz.de/index.php?de=35789

(32) ME/CFS Research Foundation. (2024). Cost Report: Long Covid and ME/CFS – Economic burden & care gap analysis. https://mecfs-research.org/costreport-long-covid-and-mecfs/.

(33) Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (BMG). (2023). Studie Charité & Max Delbrück Center: Erkenntnisse zu ME/CFS bei Long Covid. https://www.bmg-longcovid.de/zeitstrahl/studie-charite-max-delbrueck-center-erkenntnisse-me-cfs.

(34) Long Covid Plattform. (2024). ME/CFS: Chronisches Fatigue-Syndrom im Kontext von Long Covid. https://www.long-covid-plattform.de/me-cfs.

(35) Lost Voices Stiftung. (2023). Zusammenhang zwischen Long Covid und ME/CFS. https://lost-voices-stiftung.org/zusammenhang-zwischen-long-covid-und-me-cfs/.

(36) Ziyad Al-Aly, 2024, Ziyad Al-Aly is director of research and development at the VA St. Louis Health Care System and a clinical epidemiologist at Washington University in St. Louis, CBS News, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/long-covid-what-scientists-now-know/ (accessed Sept. 28, 2024)

(37) Pam Belluck, 9.8.2024, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/09/health/long-covid-world.html (accessed: 31.08.2024)

(38) Britta Domke, 16.05.2024, Manager Magazin, https://www.manager-magazin.de/lifestyle/long-covid-konferenz-wir-muessen-uns-endlich-eingestehen-wie-gewaltig-dieses-problem-ist-a-4389644b-1795-4acf-bccf-759d6dce1982 (accessed: 31.08.2024)

(39) Proplanta Agrar-Nachrichten. (2015, 7. November). DDR-Altlasten: Noch rund 1.000 Flächen belastet – Sanierungsbedarf in Sachsen-Anhalt bleibt hoch. https://www.proplanta.de/agrar-nachrichten/umwelt/ddr-altlasten-noch-rund-1-000-flaechen-belastet_article1446902833_s14468961244_seite_2.html (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(40) Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Energie, Klimaschutz und Umwelt Sachsen-Anhalt (MWU). (2025). Altlastenmanagement und Bodenschutz im Land Sachsen-Anhalt – Maßnahmen, Strategie, rechtliche Grundlagen. https://mwu.sachsen-anhalt.de/umwelt/bodenschutz/altlasten (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(41) Die Welt. (2015, 6. November). In Sachsen sind 9.000 Hektar ehemals belasteter Flächen saniert – Umweltministerium zieht Zwischenbilanz. https://www.welt.de/regionales/sachsen/article148552141/In-Sachsen-sind-9000-Hektar-ehemals-belasteter-Flaechen-saniert.html. (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(42) Medienservice Sachsen. (2015, 6. November). Sachsen: Rund 9.000 Hektar Altlastenflächen erfolgreich saniert – Umweltminister Schmidt lobt nachhaltige Förderstruktur. https://www.medienservice.sachsen.de/medien/news/199144. (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(43)  EUWID Recycling & Entsorgung. (2024, 2. Februar). Altlastensanierung Sachsen: Über 40 Millionen Euro Fördermittel bis 2027 – EFRE und Landesmittel im Überblick. https://www.euwid-recycling.de/news/politik/altlastensanierung-in-sachsen-wird-mit-ueber-40-mio-eur-gefoerdert-020224/. (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(44) Rosner, S., Herrmann, R., Schellenberger, A., & Richter, B. (2017). Sicherung und Verwahrung von uranvererzten Bergbauhalden innerhalb einer Mischaltablagerung in Dresden-Coschütz – Collmberghalde Langfassung. BAUGRUND DRESDEN Ingenieurgesellschaft mbH & IAF Radioökologie GmbH. https://www.baugrund-dresden.de/files/publikationen/2017/fachsektionstage_collmberghalde_.pdf. (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

(45) Wismut GmbH. (2024, April). Sanierung der Collmberghalde in Dresden-Coschütz – Altlastenprojekt mit radiologischer Relevanz. In DIALOG – Zeitschrift der Wismut GmbH, Ausgabe 122, S. 16–17. https://www.wismut.de/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Dialog_Ausgaben/Wi-Dialog-122_web.pdf. (Abgerufen am 3. Juli 2025)

Dieser Beitrag wurde verfasst von Birgit Bortoluzzi, kreative Gründerin der „Universität der Hoffnung“ – einer unabhängigen Wissensplattform für Resilienz, Bildung und Mitgefühl in einer komplexen Welt.