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)
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,859,299 times
Reputation: 10791

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
The EPA should be disbanded, not re-staffed and so should all the other unconstitutional alphabet soup agencies who make up laws as they go. They are all rogue.
You enjoy sniffing leaded gasoline exhaust?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:37 AM
 
1,501 posts, read 1,729,494 times
Reputation: 1444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Pointing to one rather large mistake by the EPA doesn't come close to making a case for firing, oversight and remediation of these mines is a monumental task. There are thousands of these areas nationwide that are jeopardizing our water yet you continue to reference one case as if that is the norm.
Also, I believe it was an EPA contractor that screwed things up. Not to mention, that had the mine operator not left a mess to begin with it wouldn't have been an issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:39 AM
 
45,258 posts, read 26,510,497 times
Reputation: 25013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
You enjoy sniffing leaded gasoline exhaust?
You aren't really try to claim lead would be put back in fuel absent an EPA?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:40 AM
 
34,619 posts, read 21,660,732 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by gladhands View Post
Dude, you keep citing one paper. There's a preponderance of evidence to the contrary, and DDT has been banned in 34 countries.
For what reasons?

If you are talking about shell thinning, I can point you to studies such as Cornell University's study: Poult Sci | Mobile
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,859,299 times
Reputation: 10791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
You aren't really try to claim lead would be put back in fuel absent an EPA?
I am claiming that had it not been for the EPA, we would still be sniffing it.

https://www.epa.gov/history/epa-history-lead
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,889 posts, read 26,566,286 times
Reputation: 25788
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcattwood View Post
Also, I believe it was an EPA contractor that screwed things up.
So you want to shift the blame to the guy running the backhoe, instead of the government "experts" that ordered him where and what to dig? I guess government workers are never to be held accountable for anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:43 AM
 
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,662 posts, read 81,403,499 times
Reputation: 57922
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
You enjoy sniffing leaded gasoline exhaust?
I will admit to missing the smell of un-burned gas in the exhaust on the 350 V8 I had in my 330 HP 1972 El Camino that I sold in 2007, but I didn't actually sniff it. There were no smog issues, though, as a classic older than 25 years in our state there are no tests of any kind. Now it's nice to have that much power in a modern Challenger that still gets 19/28 mpg. The EPA has done some good work, but has gone overboard in other cases. The balance between environmental protection and private property rights is difficult to achieve.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,424 posts, read 26,319,660 times
Reputation: 15706
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Why is the EPA not revisiting DDT with the threats of things like West Nike and Zeka?

I bring up DDT because it is the EPA's most egregious act and because they have stuck to their guns on it for 40 years.

It's already been shown that DDT is safe around humans. It's been shown that the lab studies about egg shell thinning were invalid because they introduced levels of DDT higher than what could possibly be encountered as well as reducing the amount of calcium in the test birds' diets. When the tests were replicated without ,DDT and the same calcium deficient diets, the shell were just as thin. When the tests were done with proper diets and expected DDT levels, the shells were normal.

The EPA has ignored this due to the practicality religious devotion to beliefs, tradition, a book and the fear of looking dumb.

This is why it is still relevant.
The World Health Organization approved DDT for use indoors in tropical countries in 2006, it is classified as a probable carcinogen. If ingested it can effect reproduction, learning ability and other impacts and it lasts decades.


The impact to Bald Eagles and other wildlife may not be as originally tested but there are still reasons for it's ban. I don't see that any scientific studies that were conclusive that we should return to DDT in the US.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,859,299 times
Reputation: 10791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlock140 View Post
I will admit to missing the smell of un-burned gas in the exhaust on the 350 V8 I had in my 330 HP 1972 El Camino that I sold in 2007, but I didn't actually sniff it. There were no smog issues, though, as a classic older than 25 years in our state there are no tests of any kind. Now it's nice to have that much power in a modern Challenger that still gets 19/28 mpg. The EPA has done some good work, but has gone overboard in other cases. The balance between environmental protection and private property rights is difficult to achieve.
Do you have specific examples of how the EPA has gone overboard?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-09-2016, 10:46 AM
 
649 posts, read 317,207 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcattwood View Post
Also, I believe it was an EPA contractor that screwed things up. Not to mention, that had the mine operator not left a mess to begin with it wouldn't have been an issue.
You are aware of all the damage done to the land in coal mining states I assume . Did you know the mining companies paid the state to reclaim those areas . What the state did with that money is anybody's guess .
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:25 PM.

© 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