Trump's nominee for head of the EPA....

sear said:
PS

" it's not upto the EPA to kill coal (etc.) It's way beyond their purview.
And imposing draconian regs that do that in practical effect is classic federal over-reach.

If you want to kill coal -you need to do it with some acquiescence by Congress." a #188

I'll meet you half way on that.

We have neither outlawed horses, nor eliminated them with speciescide / equine genocide.

BUT !!

Unlike in the 18th Century, horses are no longer a primary mode of urban transportation.
That wasn't accomplished with "draconian regs" (your term).
It was accomplished by coming up with a better solution.

Not this:

41e1544868199e748b1b238e8d6f331a41fb9e2.jpg


But instead, this:

279257748f6a711694873dd617a8bad39602b5f.JPG


I not only get your point, but to some degree share it.
There should be congressional involvement in whether or not the coal industry is shut down.

But who do you think writes EPA regs.?
Click to expand...
Exactly. The decline in coal isn't a result of any regulatory frame work. The fact that coal is incredibly wasteful and dirty compared to other existing alternatives is why it is in decline. The regulatory framework is only reflecting the fact that we can produce energy more cost effectively without the waste and pollution that coal represents via other cleaner alternatives such as natural gas. Progress moves forward.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
coal is bad because it releases mercury.....CFL lightbulbs are good even though each one contains more mercury than a ton of coal.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs095-01/fs095-01.html
http://energyblog.nationalgeographic.com/2014/01/08/separating-myth-from-fact-on-cfls-and-leds-five-concerns-addressed/
Click to expand...
How many tons of CFL's are produced vs how many tons of coal are burned? Besides, CFL's have to be managed for disposal, under Universal Waste Regulations, that mitigate the release of their mercury contents. Why shouldn't coal?
 
sear said:
#193

At this point CFL's are a horrid idea.
I agree with you that fluorescent light that risks mercury pollution is a BAD IDEA !!

It's so severe an issue the EPA.gov site actually lists the HazMat protocol for cleaning up after a CFL breaks in the home. Hint: Do not EVER use a vacuum cleaner for such cleanup, unless the vacuum cleaner is designed for that purpose. Very few are.

The energy efficiency of CFL's was better than the incandescent bulbs they replaced.

But I think LED's have superseded both.

And the most important lights in my home are 12 VDC LED. They run off the UPS. So even when the commercial power fails, my lights remain on. They don't even flicker when the power fails. It's fantastic!

And my commercial power bill is often <$30.oo / month. Beat that!
Click to expand...
If a CFL or fluorescent lamp or two breaks in your home I wouldn't worry to much about it from a safety standpoint. The concentration of them is so low that it's unlikely to be a health threat. Different story if your wife is pregnant or you have children in the home.

The real issue with mercury containing lamps is that the mercury, when emitted into the atmosphere in large enough volume, becomes an environmental issue in that mercury's exposure to sunlight, organic matter and certain aerobic bacteria can convert mercury metal/hydrides to the very toxic methyl mercury that is a persistant bioaccumulative toxin. Once it gets in an ecosystem it's damned difficult to get it out and as it moves up the food chain it can pose all sorts of ecological and health and safety problems.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Again, your getting information from biased and subjective sources. Go ahead. Upend those CAA rulings. Those coal jobs are simply not coming back. I understand and feel for those who are being displaced but progress rolls forward. We have better technologies and resources for producing energy that are far less wasteful and dirty and cost less to produce. The demand for coal domestically is in precipitate decline because it is becoming, or has become, obsolete. No changing of the regulatory climate is going to change that. That's simply wishful thinking. I mean...the telegraph and the phonograph are not going to make a comeback either.
Click to expand...


Is it biased that the EPA ignored a ruling by a Federal judge, if so then you should be able disprove it?
 
"you are creating a false dichotomy that one can't productively consider both cost and health and safety with health and safety being first priority. The idea that they are mutually incompatible is not an argument that EPA, or myself for that matter, are making." MH #197

I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle.
China's economy is improving. A relatively few decades ago workers in Peking commuted by foot or on bicycle.
Today Beijing is clogged with automobile traffic.

And as the automobile displaced the bicycle, though not exclusively because of it, Beijing's air quality has tanked; forcing the locals to wear filter masks outdoors, and run air purifiers indoors.

EVERYthing in engineering is a trade off. Everything!
 
sear said:
"you are creating a false dichotomy that one can't productively consider both cost and health and safety with health and safety being first priority. The idea that they are mutually incompatible is not an argument that EPA, or myself for that matter, are making." MH #197

I suspect the truth is somewhere in the middle.
China's economy is improving. A relatively few decades ago workers in Peking commuted by foot or on bicycle.
Today Beijing is clogged with automobile traffic.

And as the automobile displaced the bicycle, though not exclusively because of it, Beijing's air quality has tanked; forcing the locals to wear filter masks outdoors, and run air purifiers indoors.

EVERYthing in engineering is a trade off. Everything!
Click to expand...
True but we managed to resolve the problems China is now having via our environmental laws. Do you think when they Chinese public gets fed up with that level of pollution that they too will do something about it that will, again, be a compromise solution?

I'm sure that they probably will.
 
PS

"If a CFL or fluorescent lamp or two breaks in your home I wouldn't worry to much about it from a safety standpoint." MH #203

Problem is, if it breaks in an area that is ever vacuumed; even if you just leave it there for a few weeks, the next time the area is cleaned with a vacuum, the vacuum cleaner will atomize / aerosolize the Mercury, which is a neuro-toxic heavy metal.

"The concentration of them is so low that it's unlikely to be a health threat."

It's measurable in both body tissue concentrations, and in mental performance tests. The EPA scientists disagree with you.

BUT !!

Skip the CFL, and go w/ LED, and the issue is moot.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
How many tons of CFL's are produced vs how many tons of coal are burned?
Click to expand...
it isn't that a ton of CFLs give off more parts of mercury than a ton of coal......its that one CFL lightbulb gives off more parts of mercury than a ton of coal......so the question is, how many CFL lightbulbs were produced when the EPA mandated the switch......
 
"Do you think when they Chinese public gets fed up with that level of pollution that they too will do something about it that will, again, be a compromise solution?" MH #207

With Tian’anmen Square as a reference, I'm not sure China's diminutive politburo is as responsive to public sentiment as the U.S. congress is.
The Republicans tried to curtail congress' own ethics board.
The backlash was so severe the Republicans dropped it like a hot potato. Whether they'll try again when nobody's looking, who knows.
That's usually how they handle their own salary increases.

" Progress moves forward." MH #201

Well, if the prefix "pro-" means the opposite of the prefix "con-", does that mean
" Progress moves forward" and congress moves backward?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Again, your getting information from biased and subjective sources. Go ahead. Upend those CAA rulings. Those coal jobs are simply not coming back. I understand and feel for those who are being displaced but progress rolls forward. We have better technologies and resources for producing energy that are far less wasteful and dirty and cost less to produce. The demand for coal domestically is in precipitate decline because it is becoming, or has become, obsolete. No changing of the regulatory climate is going to change that. That's simply wishful thinking. I mean...the telegraph and the phonograph are not going to make a comeback either.
Click to expand...

The story comes from AP ffs!

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bec7...ebuke-judge-orders-quick-evaluation-coal-jobs
 
^
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy had responded to the judge's previous order in a lawsuit brought against her by Murray Energy Corp. that the EPA must start doing an analysis that it hadn't done in decades.

According to Wednesday's order, McCarthy asserted it would take the agency up to two years to devise a methodology to use to try to comply with the earlier ruling.

"This response is wholly insufficient, unacceptable, and unnecessary," Bailey wrote.

The judge said the EPA is required by law to analyze the economic impact on a continuing basis when enforcing the Clean Air Act and McCarthy's response "evidences the continued hostility on the part of the EPA to acceptance of the mission established by Congress.".....

(excellent link)
 
anatta said:
^
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy had responded to the judge's previous order in a lawsuit brought against her by Murray Energy Corp. that the EPA must start doing an analysis that it hadn't done in decades.

According to Wednesday's order, McCarthy asserted it would take the agency up to two years to devise a methodology to use to try to comply with the earlier ruling.

"This response is wholly insufficient, unacceptable, and unnecessary," Bailey wrote.

The judge said the EPA is required by law to analyze the economic impact on a continuing basis when enforcing the Clean Air Act and McCarthy's response "evidences the continued hostility on the part of the EPA to acceptance of the mission established by Congress.".....

(excellent link)
Click to expand...


Indeed, but Mott just dismissed it out of hand. He has worked with them for so long that he's like a hostage with Stockholm Syndrome.
 
Milagro said:
Indeed, but Mott just dismissed it out of hand. He has worked with them for so long that he's like a hostage with Stockholm Syndrome.
Click to expand...

those days are over.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy is a whack job super-enviornmentalist- who keeps trying to ignore various lower court rulings, and from what I can see Michigan v EPA..

Time for some real world reality testing on this stuff
 
anatta said:
those days are over.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy is a whack job super-enviornmentalist- who keeps trying to ignore various lower court rulings, and from what I can see Michigan v EPA..

Time for some real world reality testing on this stuff
Click to expand...

The EPA needs to realise that it is not above the law. Gina McCarthy is a classic example of the Peter Principle in action.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top