• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Its a great day for people who want more pollution in streams!

Threegoofs

Sophisticated man-about-town
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
63,561
Reaction score
28,932
Location
The city Fox News viewers are afraid to travel to
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why Congress just killed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping waste in streams - Vox

Why Congress just killed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping waste in streams

With everything that Republicans want to do — repeal Obamacare, overhaul the tax code — it might seem odd that one of Congress’ very first acts would be to kill an obscure Obama-era regulation that restricts coal companies from dumping mining waste into streams and waterways.

But that is indeed what’s going on. On Thursday, the Senate voted 54-45 to repeal the so-called “stream protection rule” — using a regulation-killing tool known as the Congressional Review Act. The House took a similar vote yesterday, and if President Trump agrees, the stream protection rule will be dead. Coal companies will now have a freer hand in dumping mining debris in streams.

Killing this regulation won’t really help Trump fulfill his goal of reversing the coal industry’s decline; that decline has more to do with cheap natural gas than anything else. Instead, Republicans are mostly focusing on this rule because they can. Because the stream protection rule wasn’t finished until very late in 2016, it’s much, much easier to kill than most of the other Obama-era rules around coal pollution. It was an easy target, so long as the GOP acted fast.

What Obama’s “stream protection rule” actually does
Coal mining is a messy business. In parts of West Virginia, Kentucky, and Virginia, for instance, mining companies often get at underground coal seams by blowing up the tops of mountains — a process known as mountaintop removal mining. Once that’s done, they’ll frequently dump the debris into the valleys below, which can contaminate streams and waterways with toxic heavy metals.

Appalachian Voices, an environmental group, estimates that coal companies have buried over 2,000 miles of streams in the region through mountaintop removal mining. And studies have found that when this all debris and waste gets into water supplies, it can have dire health impacts for the people living nearby.

Taste the flavor of victory! (Just make sure you dont taste downstream from a coal mine).
 
Surprisingly...there aren't any EPA regulations for streams and rivers. Most of the regulations seem to focus on controlling air pollution and as a result, the pollution has been redirected into the streams and rivers instead. Obama's rule was the only federal protection the waterways had.
 
And the people whose jobs involved trucking the byproduct in order to dispose of it safely are now going to be unemployed.
Thank you, Trump!
 
Surprisingly...there aren't any EPA regulations for streams and rivers. Most of the regulations seem to focus on controlling air pollution and as a result, the pollution has been redirected into the streams and rivers instead. Obama's rule was the only federal protection the waterways had.

Your assertion is a gross misstatement of the facts. From the start, the EPA has played the main role in administering the Clean Water Act. In regulating the dredging of waterways, it plays a secondary role, with the Army Corps of Engineers taking the lead.

I am happy to see this action. I would like to see the EPA dissolved outright.
 
And the people whose jobs involved trucking the byproduct in order to dispose of it safely are now going to be unemployed.
Thank you, Trump!

Don't worry. This will create plenty of jobs for people who will eventually be working on detoxifying the streams when a saner administration takes over...
 
Don't worry. This will create plenty of jobs for people who will eventually be working on detoxifying the streams when a saner administration takes over...

ugh...
 
Your assertion is a gross misstatement of the facts. From the start, the EPA has played the main role in administering the Clean Water Act. In regulating the dredging of waterways, it plays a secondary role, with the Army Corps of Engineers taking the lead.

I am happy to see this action. I would like to see the EPA dissolved outright.

Oh you're right...it's just disposal of coal waste that isn't federally regulated...


"...Yet no federal regulations specifically govern the disposal of power plant discharges into waterways or landfills. Some regulators have used laws like the Clean Water Act to combat such pollution. But those laws can prove inadequate, say regulators, because they do not mandate limits on the most dangerous chemicals in power plant waste, like arsenic and lead.

Some Coal Plants Cleanse the Air at the Expense of Waterways - The New York Times


I don't get it...you're happy to see the EPA regulate dredging waterways but want to see them dissolved outright? Don't you like clean air and water?
 
Oh you're right...it's just disposal of coal waste that isn't federally regulated...


"...Yet no federal regulations specifically govern the disposal of power plant discharges into waterways or landfills. Some regulators have used laws like the Clean Water Act to combat such pollution. But those laws can prove inadequate, say regulators, because they do not mandate limits on the most dangerous chemicals in power plant waste, like arsenic and lead.

Some Coal Plants Cleanse the Air at the Expense of Waterways - The New York Times


I don't get it...you're happy to see the EPA regulate dredging waterways but want to see them dissolved outright? Don't you like clean air and water?

The once-great Times has declined into a leftist rag. I am happy to see this burdensome regulation bite the dust and look forward to the complete dissolution of the EPA.
 
The once-great Times has declined into a leftist rag. I am happy to see this burdensome regulation bite the dust and look forward to the complete dissolution of the EPA.

Misleading the American people to war...crucifying Hillary.....yeah, the Times has declined alright...into a rightwing rag.

Good luck with your water shortage.
 
Hmm. Sounds familiar.... you making a statement unburdened by any facts, but firmly secure in your correctness.

I'm clearly stating opinion. I am not saying it is fact.

Does that clear things up?
 
Sure.
Why wouldn't you want to gamble with our water supply?:roll:

Since you imply to be enlightened, please share.

Is it your contention that any existing reasonable restrictions are harmed?
 
Since you imply to be enlightened, please share.

Is it your contention that any existing reasonable restrictions are harmed?

You are the one willing to gamble on an intuition... not me.
I'd choose to err on the side of caution, and keep all our protections of the nation's water supply in place.
 
Back
Top Bottom