Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election)

A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election)

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Guest


Guest

Http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50524

Guest


Guest

Typical of this administration.

boards of FL

boards of FL

From the article...

If there was no other reason to defeat President Obama in November, it would be the planned destruction of what is left of the U.S. economy by the Environmental Protection Agency.

...

The report provides a nightmarish look at the regulations that EPA plans to initiate, having put them under cover prior to Election Day in order to hide President Obama’s agenda of attacking the energy sector and businesses large and small.

...

These proposed regulations in aggregate, if enacted—that is to say if not stopped by congressional action based on Republican control of both the House and Senate—would prove disastrous, starting in 2013.

...

If President Obama is reelected, billions of dollars would be imposed on virtually every aspect of life in America, either directly or through the rise of the cost of everything. This reflects the Greens obsession with destroying the greatest economy the world has ever seen, our standards of living and the quality of life for every man, woman and child in America.

It's hilarious that you guys take this tripe seriously. I personally would like to read Alan Caruba's -the author of this article - work from the 1970's.

http://www.amazon.com/Caruba-Love-Lust-Other-Poems/dp/B005PPU0JQ

Ah, yes, Love, Lust, and other Poems. I'm sure this conservative hack's stab at creativity is a virtual binder full of panty-droppers!


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

[quote="boards of FL"]From the article...

If
Ah, yes, Love, Lust, and other Poems. I'm sure this conservative hack's stab at creativity is a virtual binder full of panty-droppers!


Sleep Sleep Sleep

Guest


Guest

[quote="nochain"]
boards of FL wrote:From the article...

If
Ah, yes, Love, Lust, and other Poems. I'm sure this conservative hack's stab at creativity is a virtual binder full of panty-droppers!


Sleep Sleep Sleep

There seems to be a big push to put off many things until after the election!....

stormwatch89

stormwatch89

I just received 3 flyers in today's mail from The Alliance for America's Future supporting the coal industry saying that EPA will destroy 1.6 million jobs with their regulations and how it will affect all of our personal costs.

It probably also helps to have a manufacturing background to really understand what EPA can do and the costs that can result.

At one time they answered to no one. I don't know if it is still the same, but they had far too much power with no accountability.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

In one of my lifes I was an environmental professional for 16 years. My employer was a consulting firm that served both government and indusrial clients. At one time I held certification as a Certified Hazardous Materials Manager (CHMM).

I looked at that laundry list of regulations and a lot of it isn't new at all, but represents changes to existing regulations. For instance, the Spill Prevention and Control Countermeasures (SPCC) rule has been in place for years. You can thank the Exxon Valdez for that. The 1990 Oil Pollution Control Act (1990-Bush41), requires folks to have an SPCC Plan if they store over a certain amount of oil or chemicals in above ground storage tanks. I wrote several SPCC plans for clients when I worked in that field.

The Green House gas regulation using the Clean Air Act (CAA) and hydraulic fracturing rules for the petroleum industry are the newest environmental regulations. Personally, I think using the CAA to enact greenhouse gas regulations is regulatory over-reach. Since I am an advocate of domestic energy development (hint: it keeps wingnuts from wanting to make war for foreign oil resources), I am agaiinst anything that over-regulates hydraulic fracturing. "Fracking" is too crutial for development of oil and gas resources in tight-shale formations. Radical environmentalists who want to ban all use of hydrocarbons (greenhouse gas freaks) have taken aim at fracking as a potential achilles heel that they can target, and have greatly overstated its potential harms to the point of stupidity.

But, as Boards stated, a lot of this article is meant to stir-up the angst of those of a certain ideology. It is like kicking a fire ant mount and watching the ants scurry around aimlessly.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

The article references the senate minority report... it's hard to find mention of it in the main stream media. Go figure.

VectorMan

VectorMan

Current energy policies are bad for jobs and America in general.

Remember, your energy bill will skyrocket.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Of course we could have no environmental regulations at all--it would be good for business--but the flip side is we would have air quality like in Beijing on a sunny day:

A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election) Beijing_Smog

...If their air-quality is that bad, it makes me shudder to think how polluted their surface waters (rivers and lakes) are:

A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election) Xin_3110

Excerpt from the caption: "Untreated industrial sewage of a textile dyeing factory is drained from an outlet into the Yangtze River in Yichang, central China's Hubei Province..."

Industry would not be allowed to do that in the United States. Perhaps some on this forum would rather have open-pipe discharges into the Escambia River and Bay again if it would bring more industrial jobs back to Northwest Florida. You know that being able to have unregulated environmental discharges gives China a huge competitive edge over America. There is a definite cost factor for environmental compliance.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

There is common sense... it's never been acceptable to cause harm to innocent others in this country.

There may be the need for a larger environmental scope... just as there is a need for healthcare reform...

But who in a clear mind takes them on during an economic crisis? it males no sense... except in some ideological delusion.

VectorMan

VectorMan

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:Of course we could have no environmental regulations at all--it would be good for business--but the flip side is we would have air quality like in Beijing on a sunny day:

A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election) Beijing_Smog

...If their air-quality is that bad, it makes me shudder to think how polluted their surface waters (rivers and lakes) are:

A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election) Xin_3110

Excerpt from the caption: "Untreated industrial sewage of a textile dyeing factory is drained from an outlet into the Yangtze River in Yichang, central China's Hubei Province..."

Industry would not be allowed to do that in the United States. Perhaps some on this forum would rather have open-pipe discharges into the Escambia River and Bay again if it would bring more industrial jobs back to Northwest Florida. You know that being able to have unregulated environmental discharges gives China a huge competitive edge over America. There is a definite cost factor for environmental compliance.

I agree. But, our EPA is going overboard. Too much power without enough accountability. IMO.

And, if they're delaying job killing regulations until after the election to help Obama, well, that's even worse.

And, if I understand it correctly, none of the EPA officials are elected officials,

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Those "job-killing" regulations created a whole new industry employing thousands of people and hundreds of new companies as firms sprang up to help businesses and governments comply. Google "environmental consultants." My second career was in that field.

My employer had industrial clients and government agency clients as well. We were the only consultants that the Carrier Corporation and Helena Chemicals used since about 1980, and these were client numbers 002 and 001, respectively on the list of clients.

The industrial clients never complained about the regulations. They knew they were there and counted on us to help get them into compliance.

My personal opinion is that America has the strongest environmental regulations in the world; though some seem to think there is some sort conspiracy between industry and government to slowly poison our citizens. Florida is heavily regulated at the state level. In 2008, I had opportunity to review the environmental programs in all 50 states for my employer. Florida's program is more comprehensive than any of the other 49 states, in my humble opinion. You would be surprised how lax the regulations are in states considered to be "liberal." You can do stuff in New Jersey and Massachusetts you could never get away with here. And California--a very liberal state? I was really surprised to see how disjointed their program was, compared to Florida's.

I don't think anyone would want to go back to the days of unregulated environmental discharges. And here is a funny thing: Some of the most comprehensive of our national environmental laws (NEPA, CWA, CAA, RCRA, SARA, OPA) were signed into law by Republican Presidents. You can thank Nixon for creating the EPA in the first place. He both proposed it and established the agency in 1970.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

Where does that "new industry" derive it's funding? Even if it's forced on the corps it comes out of our pocket.

Again... a terrible idea during an economic crisis. Do you agree?

knothead

knothead

[quote="newswatcher"]
nochain wrote:
boards of FL wrote:From the article...

If
Ah, yes, Love, Lust, and other Poems. I'm sure this conservative hack's stab at creativity is a virtual binder full of panty-droppers!


Sleep Sleep Sleep

There seems to be a big push to put off many things until after the election!....


I agree . . . . . beginning with the Mittster's tax plan or perhaps the release of his own tax records.

Guest


Guest

LOL... politicize common sense. You're barely ineligible.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » A Look Ahead to EPA Regulations for 2013 (delayed till after election)

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum