@Bigun
I really and truly understand your emotions,but the reality is that we just can't afford to do that because if we did,who knows how many people would die as a result,or how much of the planet would become useless for decades,and maybe even centuries?
What we NEED is people in the EPA who are not dedicated leftists. We need sane,rational people who believe in protecting the planet while at the same time looking for alternative methods or processes that would not be harmful to the planet and future generations.
There IS some room for compromises,and compromises will encourage scientists and industry to search for safer alternatives instead of just shutting everything down.
There may be some cases where there ARE no alternatives,but I have to believe that can't possibly be true in all cases. Or even most/
We need to protect the planet while searching for safe alternative methods for industry. Right now it seems like the entire EPA is under the control of idiots who worship "Mother Ghia" and think we are her slaves who were born to serve her,instead of understanding that the planet is here to serve mankind as well as all other living creatures.
NO civilization can continue to advance if no new ideas are tried and sometimes accepted. Leaving the door open to POSSIBLE alternatives is what will CREATE possible alternatives. NOBODY is going to spend decades,or even years working on some new technology that they KNOW will never be accepted because it doesn't bow at the feet of the PC Goddess Ghia. All that will do is stifle any possible advancement,and put us back into the Stone Age.
@sneakypete Pete...
I directly dealt with EPA, State, and Local regulatory bodies for over 30 years, mostly as an Environmental Manager at a Plant.
Let me start with yes, there was a point by the 50's and '60's where our technological advances created an unaccepable amount of combustion , waste, and water discharges that were not acceptable. At that time, late '60's to about 1980 with the promulatin of RCRA (hazardous wastes law), the need was urgent, and Congress properly acted to bring standards to the regulated community.
This worked well until about 1990, with the CAA (Clean Air Act) Re-authorization. At about that time, many radical factions got into the agency, and started the slippery slope of creating a bureacracy and gestapo like enforcement system that was more predicated on technicalities and "got-chas" than thinking through the process of doing things that actually would cost effectively elimated excess emission, reduced waste, and improved water quality effluent. Many of us saw the EPA more powerful and opressive, than even the IRS.
Yes, and at about that time the concept of equitable environmental improvement return on investment DIED. I could give you a dozen horror stories around EPA abuse of powers, but don't have the time or the inclination to rehash that shit. So, actually I support dismantling the EPA...... And at least bring it back to its common sense criteria staffing, and regulatory powers that I remember early in my career.
