Life in Good ol DEREGULATED Texas

christiefan915 said:
i don't hafta do nuthin cept point out wut a sick bigoted lowlife is Russell Walker.
Click to expand...

he iz a sick bigoted lowlife

but zappacrite sed he wuzza trumpkin

on aug 24

sinse then hez run away from providin enny proof

that makez him a "little troll bitch" 2 uze hiz own werdz

now it seemz hiz mommy kant find enny proof that russell walker iz a trumpkin either

btw zappocrite sez norfolk street isnt neer lakewood church

:rofl2:
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And NOW we know why...


REVEALED: Burning Houston chemical plant successfully lobbied Trump to strike down safety rules


Arkema, the company that owns the chemical plant in Crosby, Texas, that suffered at least two separate explosions on Thursday, successfully lobbied the Trump administration to delay new safety rules for chemical plants that were due to take effect this year.

The International Business Times reports that Obama-era regulations of chemical plants that were supposed to take effect this past March 14 “were halted by the Trump administration after a furious lobbying campaign by plant owner Arkema and its affiliated trade association, the American Chemistry Council, which represents a chemical industry that has poured tens of millions of dollars into federal elections.”

In killing the new rules, the industry had the help of several Texas Republican lawmakers, including Sen. John Cornyn, Rep. Joe Barton, Rep. Pete Olson, Rep. Pete Sessions and Rep. Kevin Brady. Democratic Texas Rep. Gene Green also lobbied to have the new regulations killed.

Arkema directly objected to the new proposed rules in a letter it sent to the EPA this past May, in which it said the rules “will likely add significant new costs and burdens to the corporate audit process.”

According to the International Business Times, Arkema specifically took issue with new “Safer Technology and Alternatives Analysis” (STAA) rules that would have, among other things, encouraged companies to “simplify covered processes in order to make accidental releases less likely or the impacts of such releases less severe.”

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/08/rev...ly-lobbied-trump-to-strike-down-safety-rules/
Click to expand...
Again the reporters are demonizing the company without knowing all the facts. There are legitimate reasons why the three major industry sectors (petroleum and coal products, paper, chemicals) would oppose the STAA or would lobby on behalf of how the rule would be finalized and implemented.

It may conflict or be redundant with existing Federal, State and local law.

Existing Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) are already required every five years under EPA's Risk Management Program (RMP) for category 3 facilities.

STAA recommendations could conflict with recognized and generally excepted good engineering practices.

The can be economically impractical as the could make a process unit fiscally unfeasable by impacting capital cost, creating process stoppages, impacting product quality, total manufacturing cost, operability of the plant, future demolition clean up and disposal cost, etc,.

they could have negative social consequences like negative visual, noise, changing traffic patterns or other nuisance effects.

Process changes could violate licensing agreements that cannot be modified.

They could decrease a specific hazard but increase overall risk.

So understand that though STAA may very well be a good idea like any "good idea" the devil is in the details and as I've shown above Category 3 RMP facilities do have legitimate concerns on how STAA would impact them.
 
Last edited:
I give you props here Mott. You easily could have played the partisan game but you were honest.
 
cawacko said:
I give you props here Mott. You easily could have played the partisan game but you were honest.
Click to expand...

See...I told you many times I'm not the knee jerk communist I'm stereotyped as being. ;)

Besides shit like this gets really complicated which defies most people's desire to have simple cliche solutions to complex problems.
 
Shows how easily an idiot like zappity do da can be conned into believing anything.....too bad no one
else has an iq as low as his.....
 
Trump admin getting ready to acknowledge Obama was right

Here is a classic case of an "Oh shit! I fucked up!" moment,

After Harvey, the Trump administration reconsiders the Obama flood rules it just rolled back

A couple of weeks ago President Trump scrapped Obama-era rules, intended to reduce the risks posed by flooding, that established new construction standards for roads, housing and other infrastructure projects that receive federal dollars.

Trump derided these restrictions, which were written in response to growing concerns over the impact of climate change, and other federal rules as useless red tape holding back the economy.

“This overregulated permitting process is a massive, self*inflicted wound on our country — it’s disgraceful — denying our people much-needed investments in their community,” he said in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York during an event to tout his infrastructure policies.

But now, in the wake of the massive flooding and destruction caused by Hurricane Harvey along the Gulf Coast, the Trump administration is considering whether to issue similar requirements to build higher in flood-prone areas as the government prepares to spend billions of dollars in response to the storm.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...2e5cf46c1e2_story.html?utm_term=.f2ee233573fa
Click to expand...
 
Mott the Hoople said:
See...I told you many times I'm not the knee jerk communist I'm stereotyped as being. ;)

Besides shit like this gets really complicated which defies most people's desire to have simple cliche solutions to complex problems.
Click to expand...

Hahahahaha. Admittedly much of what you wrote went over my head but I appreciate being able to read a more accurate/honest account.

That's the problem with stories like this and sites like rawstory. If you are knowledgeable on a topic you can recognize the biases or falsehoods. If it's a topic you aren't as familiar with you have to rely on them being honest.
 
Cypress said:
Here is a classic case of an "Oh shit! I fucked up!" moment,
Click to expand...
Yup...the classic mistake of deregulatory is failing to consider why something was regulated in the first place.

Conversely the failing of a lot of regulation is not foreseeing all said regulations consequences. Which is why I'm not fond of knee jerk responses to regulation/deregulation. Regulation/Deregulation should always be done within an environment of considering feedback and data from all stakeholders.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yup...the classic mistake of deregulatory is failing to consider why something was regulated in the first place.

Conversely the failing of a lot of regulation is not foreseeing all said regulations consequences. Which is why I'm not fond of knee jerk responses to regulation/deregulation. Regulation/Deregulation should always be done within an environment of considering feedback and data from all stakeholders.
Click to expand...

Wow, Mott is two for two today!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yup...the classic mistake of deregulatory is failing to consider why something was regulated in the first place.

Conversely the failing of a lot of regulation is not foreseeing all said regulations consequences. Which is why I'm not fond of knee jerk responses to regulation/deregulation. Regulation/Deregulation should always be done within an environment of considering feedback and data from all stakeholders.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, government rule-making and regulations, ideally, need to be based on careful deliberation and scientific or engineering justification, where appropriate.

California's regulation-making process, requires state agencies to consider adverse environmental and economic impacts that could result from otherwise well-intentioned regulation, as well as public input and peer review. Which is how it should be. I'm sure other states have something similar.
 
cawacko said:
Hahahahaha. Admittedly much of what you wrote went over my head but I appreciate being able to read a more accurate/honest account.

That's the problem with stories like this and sites like rawstory. If you are knowledgeable on a topic you can recognize the biases or falsehoods. If it's a topic you aren't as familiar with you have to rely on them being honest.
Click to expand...
Sorry about that. As you know this a topic in which I have some professional expertise and I spelled the detail to be clear I wasn't just stating an opinion.

To sum my response up, companies that produce or store hazardous materials are already required to publicly disclose to localities those inventories if they exceed specific quantities. My second point is that what may appear to be good regulation could have undesirable or unforeseen consequences.

As for anything you read in the press...well that's caveat emptor as you already knew.
 
Cypress said:
Well, yes, government rule-making and regulations, ideally, need to be based on careful deliberation and scientific or engineering justification, where appropriate.

California's regulation-making process, requires state agencies to consider adverse environmental and economic impacts that could result from otherwise well-intentioned regulation, as well as public input and peer review. Which is how it should be. I'm sure other states have something similar.
Click to expand...
I believe so. Ohio certainly does and that's true at the Federal level too.

By that I mean proposed rules and regulation have public comment periods before they are adopted, revised or dropped.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Again the reporters are demonizing the company without knowing all the facts. There are legitimate reasons why the three major industry sectors (petroleum and coal products, paper, chemicals) would oppose the STAA or would lobby on behalf of how the rule would be finalized and implemented.

It may conflict or be redundant with existing Federal, State and local law.

Existing Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) are already required every five years under EPA's Risk Management Program (RMP) for category 3 facilities.

STAA recommendations could conflict with recognized and generally excepted good engineering practices.

The can be economically impractical as the could make a process unit fiscally unfeasable by impacting capital cost, creating process stoppages, impacting product quality, total manufacturing cost, operability of the plant, future demolition clean up and disposal cost, etc,.

they could have negative social consequences like negative visual, noise, changing traffic patterns or other nuisance effects.

Process changes could violate licensing agreements that cannot be modified.

They could decrease a specific hazard but increase overall risk.

So understand that though STAA may very well be a good idea like any "good idea" the devil is in the details and as I've shown above Category 3 RMP facilities do have legitimate concerns on how STAA would impact them.
Click to expand...

I see a whole lot of "could be's" and "could have's" and "may conflict's".

What I don't see are any actual facts.

Remember the plant that exploded in West, Texas?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-new...plant-explosion-was-criminal-act-feds-n572231

I bet the people of West, Texas wished they'd had a bit more Government oversight/EPA regulation of the plant that exploded and blew half their town off the map.
 
christiefan915 said:
Russell Walker is a 24-karat bigot. No wonder some cons love him. He could actually be a few posters here.

From: Russell Walker < littlefarm1@windstream.net>

Date: January 8, 2017 at 8:57:02 AM EST

To: 'Moore Tea Citizens - Programs' < mooreteacitizens@gmail.com>

Cc: noakley@elon.edu

Subject: RE: truth

Miriam – you are a seed-of-the-serpent (Gen 3:15) kike jew. You will burn in hell for an eternity. Jews hate white Christian society and do all in their power to destroy it. You will be celebrating Martin Lucifer Koon this month. How sickening.

Christ told the kike jews that their father was Satan and that they lusted after their father. John 8:44

You apparently are married to a yellow belly slant-eyed chink and believe in interracial mongrelization. I don't.

http://www.christdescendedfromjoseph.com/tea-party-hypocrisy.html
Click to expand...

Oh of course that guy is a bigot and of course he's a Trump supporter.

This is just another childish "gotcha" game from Yurt/YoYo/racist Nazi.

No matter which name he hides behind, the childish "gotcha" games are always the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top