Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 42

Thread: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as pollutant i

  1. #31
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,842

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    I'm not really sure why people take issue with the idea that contaminated water could be considered a pollutant given the wrong circumstances.

    As usual, the issue seems to be absolute thinking. Obviously water isn't always a pollutant, even water runoff isn't always a pollutant. However, given the circumstances in this particular area the EPA decided that the runoff was polluting this particular river.

    But no. Any time the EPA steps in on something we have to just assume its this big scary power grab omg its 1984 time!

    Well, they kind have a track record as of late overstepping their bounds.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Interesting how this thread has been derailed by libs trying to excuse the EPA by talking about run off water that is polluted instead of the link given in the OP which is about a heavy volume of water not polluted water. I guess you guys just can't find any excuse for that so you have to extrapolate into an entirely different issue. Same old lib tactic and even I fell for it.

  3. #33
    Tavern Bartender
    #NeverOprah
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,610

    Re: Federal judge rules water as pollutant i

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Interesting how this thread has been derailed by libs trying to excuse the EPA by talking about run off water that is polluted instead of the link given in the OP which is about a heavy volume of water not polluted water. I guess you guys just can't find any excuse for that so you have to extrapolate into an entirely different issue. Same old lib tactic and even I fell for it.
    The govt is always right, don't ask questions.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Interesting how this thread has been derailed by libs trying to excuse the EPA by talking about run off water that is polluted instead of the link given in the OP which is about a heavy volume of water not polluted water. I guess you guys just can't find any excuse for that so you have to extrapolate into an entirely different issue. Same old lib tactic and even I fell for it.
    It is a heavy volume of storm runoff, which is very likely to be polluted. The judge said that storm water in general is not a pollutant, which seems to be his opinion, not a statement based on the facts. Storm water that has run over agricultural areas and any area with a dense population is almost certainly polluted with fertilizers, pesticides, oil, gasoline and other substances. If the EPA stipulated that the storm water is clean, it would be a different mater, but the article does not say whether they did that or not.

  5. #35
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    It is a heavy volume of storm runoff, which is very likely to be polluted. The judge said that storm water in general is not a pollutant, which seems to be his opinion, not a statement based on the facts. Storm water that has run over agricultural areas and any area with a dense population is almost certainly polluted with fertilizers, pesticides, oil, gasoline and other substances. If the EPA stipulated that the storm water is clean, it would be a different mater, but the article does not say whether they did that or not.
    Then it needs to regulate the actual pollutants in that water (at the source) rather than the water itself.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Well, they kind have a track record as of late overstepping their bounds.
    Does the EPA actually over step its bounds, or do some opinion makers in media and politics just create that impression because they are representing the interests of corporate polluters who buy advertising and make campaign donations? My philosophy is that one should always distrust the opinions of people who are receiving money from one side of a debate.

  7. #37
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    02-08-13 @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    843

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This isn't a "power grab" its about two different opinions on what a pollutant is and is not, I can understand the argument for stormwater being considered a pollutent because it can alter and change an enviroment if there's simply way too much of it. But its a natural change not like if you dumped a galleon of gasoline into a creek.
    I don’t think you realize what stormwater can, and regularly does contain. Consider for a moment a regular source of stormwater.

    oilSpot_1.jpg

  8. #38
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    01-17-16 @ 05:09 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,122

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Then it needs to regulate the actual pollutants in that water (at the source) rather than the water itself.
    I doubt that is the most practical solution. There will always be automobile related contaminants and it would be very difficult and extremely expensive to prevent the use of all agricultural fertilizers and pesticides.

  9. #39
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    I doubt that is the most practical solution. There will always be automobile related contaminants and it would be very difficult and extremely expensive to prevent the use of all agricultural fertilizers and pesticides.
    And yet we do regulate all those things already. Sounds like the regulation in place just isn't effective/monitored enough.

  10. #40
    Educator
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    02-08-13 @ 10:14 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    843

    Re: Federal judge rules EPA overstepped authority trying to regulate water as polluta

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    And yet we do regulate all those things already. Sounds like the regulation in place just isn't effective/monitored enough.
    The problem is the natural choke-point. The storm water systems represents a unmoving, single point source that makes them far easier to track and check out.

    On the other hand vehicles leak sources represent mobile, widely dispersed [potential] sources. This makes them, alone, much harder to monitor. You really, really do not want the overhead of private vehicles being tracked for tiny drops coming of them.

    EDIT: I haven’t gotten around to checking out the ruling or details of the case. But what the EPA might have to do is provide an out where if you can show reasonable expectation of no contaminate it is not a “pollutant”.

    P.S. Even ‘clean’ rain water when redirected can cause enormous damage to an natural waterway.
    Last edited by Dwight; 01-07-13 at 03:49 PM.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •