Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:17 PM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,752,746 times
Reputation: 6856

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm View Post
while i recognize that the EPA has done some good things for this country, i do like drinking clean water and breathing clean air, there is a tipping point where the agency goes from being effective to being draconian. they have reached that tipping point.
No it hasn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:18 PM
 
Location: Allendale MI
2,523 posts, read 2,199,416 times
Reputation: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
I fear they don't realize that. They just see "coal" and all coal is the same...dirty, smelly and air polluting and we need to eradicate its usage.
(I've read plenty of your posts explaining this and it did educate me. Thank you).
Actaully it is from coal power plants and factories. He just made that up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Holly Springs, NC USA
3,457 posts, read 4,646,270 times
Reputation: 1907
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
But I thought the solution to all of our problems was to simply let polluters pollute and there wouldn't ever be a health cost to anyone. That's what Republicans have been claiming for decades now.
Yep, you are so insightful and intelligent. I myslef have been saying that as a Republican for years. It is our credo and we recite it at the beginning of all our meetings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,337,210 times
Reputation: 27718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
But I thought the solution to all of our problems was to simply let polluters pollute and there wouldn't ever be a health cost to anyone. That's what Republicans have been claiming for decades now.
And how does US politics related to China ? Stretching aren't you ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:30 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,931,532 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
The very same coal Republicans claim we need to use here to be "cost competitive".
Very few people in the US use coal for heat or cooking in a residential setting and those that do use anthracite which produces no soot. When you pile a couple million people into a small area with a large portion of them are using soft coal in residential stoves that have absolutely no pollution control and then pile onto that industries with little to no pollution control the result is what you're going to see in China.

The PM or particulate matter allowed to be emitted into the atmosphere is already regulated by the EPA and has been for years. This cost money and is an acceptable expenditure of funds but there is point of diminishing returns and we are way beyond that already.

Last edited by thecoalman; 02-01-2013 at 05:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:34 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,931,532 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
No it hasn't.
The recent mercury regulations will decrease mercury deposition rates in the US from 1% to 10% resulting in the average IQ increasing an estimated 2/1000 of one point. That's acceptable?



Quote:
Economic Valuation of Human Health Benefits of Controlling Mercury Emissions from U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants

Changes in mercury deposition rates associated with reductions in power plant
mercury emissions are based on regional deposition modeling results from the EPA's
analysis of the Clear Skies Initiative. In its analysis, the EPA simulated current mercury
deposition rates and the changes in these rates that would result if power plants
reduced their mercury emissions from the current rate of 49 tons per year to either 26 or
15 tons per year. We used these predictions to estimate changes in deposition rates for
the freshwater regions, the Atlantic Coastal Region, and the Gulf of Mexico. Estimated
decreases range from approximately 1% to 10%.
The change in deposition rates to the
All Other Waters region is assumed to be proportional to the change in total global
emissions that would result from U.S. power plant emissions reductions, which is less
than 1%.


Quote:
Regulatory Impact Analysis for the Final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards


The average effect on individual avoided IQ loss in 2016 is 0.00209 IQ points, with total nationwide benefits estimated between $0.5 and $6.1 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:37 PM
 
Location: ATX-HOU
10,216 posts, read 8,100,586 times
Reputation: 2037
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The recent mercury regulations will decrease mercury deposition rates in the US from 1% to 10% resulting in the average IQ increasing an estimated 2/1000 of one point. That's acceptable?
Good deal. Let's also add sulfar to that list of why coal is generally bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:38 PM
 
Location: Out in the Badlands
10,420 posts, read 10,803,767 times
Reputation: 7801
Hey it's like SOCAL you can't trust that air if you can't see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:40 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,931,532 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michigantown View Post
Actaully it is from coal power plants and factories. He just made that up.
You're being serious? Coal is used extensively for residential heat in China, look it up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2013, 05:41 PM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,931,532 times
Reputation: 17863
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033 View Post
Good deal. Let's also add sulfar to that list of why coal is generally bad.
2/1000 of one point is a good deal?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top