EPA unleashes environmental disaster, tries to stone wall and cover up and President is silent
The EPA obviously screwed up and people will be compensated for damages. The problem is the tone of people who somehow think the EPA created this pollution problem in the first place.
And maybe heavy metal seepage rates were such that a cleanup was not required. I don't know. And arsenic is by all accounts poisonous and carcinogenic.
Arsenic is a naturally occurring element and exists in things like ground water, apple juice, etc. There are acceptable levels of arsenic in foods set by the FDA/EPA. I'm guessing the water supply in the adjacent communities had acceptable levels of these things. Otherwise, the communities would have pushed for solutions.
But again. The EPA took a manageable problem and created a crisis. This is the issue. I hope they enjoy the additional funding. I'm sure they will.
ffof said:
So bramzz, are you for funding the EPA more so they can do their job properly across America? Or are you for unfunding govt agencies, and the EPA specifically, because well, it's big govt?
Instead of throwing more money st the problem. Perhaps, the EPA (and their agents) would become mpre effective if such disasters were investigated thoroughly with an eye towards examining whether EPA negligence played a part.
Terp,
Do you believe the EPA intentionally poisoned the Animas River, as that Zero Hedge post you linked to accuses?
A yes or no will suffice.
To counter the obvious retort, yes, I believe the EPA screwed up. They are ultimately responsible for the work of their contractors, just as Secretary Sebelius was ultimately responsible for the healthcare.gov screw up.s
PVW said:
bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stick by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?
So now that we see what can happen when private businesses are not held accountable for cleaning up a site, and we let a government agency try to remediate, are we going to ask Exxon to clean up the NJ sites that were recently settled for pennies on the dollar? Or perhaps they should actually clean it up rather than settle and leave the state to do the clean up. I imagine that both Tyler and Zoinks will be reaching out to Christie's office immediately to demand that Exxon do its own clean up, right?
TylerDurden said:
Arsenic is a naturally occurring element and exists in things like ground water, apple juice, etc. There are acceptable levels of arsenic in foods set by the FDA/EPA. I'm guessing the water supply in the adjacent communities had acceptable levels of these things. Otherwise, the communities would have pushed for solutions.
What on Earth would make you believe that?
Also, the fact that arsenic is naturally occurring is neither here nor there. There are lots of naturally occurring substances that are toxic. In the West, there are some small streams and springs that are naturally unsafe due the concentrations of arsenic or heavy metals or salts.
RealityForAll said:
ffof said:Instead of throwing more money st the problem. Perhaps, the EPA (and their agents) would become mpre effective if such disasters were investigated thoroughly with an eye towards examining whether EPA negligence played a part.
So bramzz, are you for funding the EPA more so they can do their job properly across America? Or are you for unfunding govt agencies, and the EPA specifically, because well, it's big govt?
Do you doubt that such an investigation will occur?
tjohn said:
The EPA obviously screwed up and people will be compensated for damages. The problem is the tone of people who somehow think the EPA created this pollution problem in the first place.
And maybe heavy metal seepage rates were such that a cleanup was not required. I don't know. And arsenic is by all accounts poisonous and carcinogenic.
It appears that the mining company existed before the EPA existed. Further, no facts have been presented that suggest the mining company did not comply with relevant environmental laws at the time of operation. Yes there was relatively minor leaching before the failure.
The but for standard of causation is frequently used in negligence cases. As a result we must ask: but for the action of EPA (and their agents) would this significant failure have occurred. Answer: no. Thus, it apoears that the EPA was the cause of this failure.
ParticleMan said:
RealityForAll said:Do you doubt that such an investigation will occur?
ffof said:Instead of throwing more money st the problem. Perhaps, the EPA (and their agents) would become mpre effective if such disasters were investigated thoroughly with an eye towards examining whether EPA negligence played a part.
So bramzz, are you for funding the EPA more so they can do their job properly across America? Or are you for unfunding govt agencies, and the EPA specifically, because well, it's big govt?
No doubt some sort of investigation will occur.
To particleman: Are you convinced that such investigation will have an eye towards looking for negligence of EPA employees and agents?
RealityForAll said:
PVW said:The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stic by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?
bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
No, the point was that no concern about pollution of waters has ever been raised by that poster until it was the fault of a government agency.
No outrage about the Elk River spill last year.
No outrage against BP, even, when that disaster happened.
It's clear that his point is not the spill. He doesn't care about the people or the water. He is only interested in pointing out the EPA screw up.
TylerDurden said:
tjohn said:Clearly the answer is to let all the pollution leak into the river at once.
TylerDurden said:Aside from the irrational speculation that this mess is an EPA conspiracy, I couldn't tell from the expert retired geologist exactly what the proper solution was. Was it OK to let the 500 gallons per minute flow of mine water into Cement Creek continue as it was?
Interesting letter to the editor of the local paper just days before the incident.
ffof said:The predictable argument: When private industry messes up, they must be punished and/or shut down! When government messes up, they just need more funding. As if this happened due to EPA inaction.
So bramzz, are you for funding the EPA more so they can do their job properly across America? Or are you for unfunding govt agencies, and the EPA specifically, because well, it's big govt?
It makes one wonder how this event would be portrayed if this happened under the Bush admin.
That's not the whole picture. When private industry messes up they deny all responsibility. Years later when the damage to human or animal life is obvious and measured a court case may ensue. Many years later there may be a punishment or shutdown. Of course said punishment has no effect on the individuals who made the decisions and profited personally.
Other private industries are lucky enough to continue to extract profit from the land until their industry runs its' course or all the valuable resources have been extracted.
RealityForAll said:
ParticleMan said:Are you convinced that such investigation will have an eye towards looking for negligence of EPA employees and agents?
RealityForAll said:Do you doubt that such an investigation will occur?
ffof said:Instead of throwing more money st the problem. Perhaps, the EPA (and their agents) would become mpre effective if such disasters were investigated thoroughly with an eye towards examining whether EPA negligence played a part.
So bramzz, are you for funding the EPA more so they can do their job properly across America? Or are you for unfunding govt agencies, and the EPA specifically, because well, it's big govt?
Only if there is a criminal investigation. When the NTSB does an investigation, they do not have "an eye toward looking for negligence..." They examine the facts and go where those facts lead them.
That said, i think it's obvious that there was some level of negligence (as understood by non-lawyers). Whether it rises to the level of criminal negligence is another story.
RealityForAll said:
tjohn said:It appears that the mining company existed before the EPA existed. Further, no facts have been presented that suggest the mining company did not comply with relevant environmental laws at the time of operation. Yes there was relatively minor leaching before the failure.
The EPA obviously screwed up and people will be compensated for damages. The problem is the tone of people who somehow think the EPA created this pollution problem in the first place.
And maybe heavy metal seepage rates were such that a cleanup was not required. I don't know. And arsenic is by all accounts poisonous and carcinogenic.
The but for standard of causation is frequently used in negligence cases. As a result we must ask: but for the action of EPA (and their agents) would this significant failure have occurred. Answer: no. Thus, it apoears that the EPA was the cause of this failure.
At the time of active mining, I don't think there were any environmental regulations.
As far as the "minor" leaching, I do not believe that anybody has presented evidence as to whether or not it was leading to unsafe levels of arsenic and heavy metals in the Animas River.
bramzzoinks said:
The mine last operated 90 years ago.
And we are still paying for it.
ParticleMan said:
Terp,
Do you believe the EPA intentionally poisoned the Animas River, as that Zero Hedge post you linked to accuses?
A yes or no will suffice.
To counter the obvious retort, yes, I believe the EPA screwed up. They are ultimately responsible for the work of their contractors, just as Secretary Sebelius was ultimately responsible for the healthcare.gov screw up.s
I don't believe they intentionally caused this spill. That being said, I don't totally discount the letter to the editor. While I don't see any specific evidence of it, and its clearly speculative, I don't think its a giant stretch that bureaucrats within the EPA might be ambitious enough to angle for a Superfund project.
tjohn said:
TylerDurden said:What on Earth would make you believe that?
Arsenic is a naturally occurring element and exists in things like ground water, apple juice, etc. There are acceptable levels of arsenic in foods set by the FDA/EPA. I'm guessing the water supply in the adjacent communities had acceptable levels of these things. Otherwise, the communities would have pushed for solutions.
Also, the fact that arsenic is naturally occurring is neither here nor there. There are lots of naturally occurring substances that are toxic. In the West, there are some small streams and springs that are naturally unsafe due the concentrations of arsenic or heavy metals or salts.
Because if they weren't you damn well better believe sycophants in the media and on this board would make sure I heard about it.
ParticleMan said:
RealityForAll said:No, the point was that no concern about pollution of waters has ever been raised by that poster until it was the fault of a government agency.
PVW said:The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stic by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?
bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
No outrage about the Elk River spill last year.
No outrage against BP, even, when that disaster happened.
It's clear that his point is not the spill. He doesn't care about the people or the water. He is only interested in pointing out the EPA screw up.
He is the ying to your yang.
RobB said:
Do the @'s still work? Let's check.
@ridski
It makes one wonder how this event would be portrayed if this happened under the Bush admin.
Sure, we can wonder if we like. I'm not sure what good it will do while pollutants are heading through the river systems there now.
Are you serious? No need to wonder. Bush and Cheney secretly negotiated with fracking companies that they would not be responsible for the environmental damager they cause.
It makes one wonder how this event would be portrayed if this happened under the Bush admin.
The EPA screwed up and immediately took responsibility.
Do the libertarians have a solution to these scenarios? A private company comes in, extracts what it can from the earth and leaves a terrible mess behind that will last for generations. It's then up to the government to monitor and remediate.
TylerDurden said:ParticleMan said:He is the ying to your yang.
RealityForAll said:No, the point was that no concern about pollution of waters has ever been raised by that poster until it was the fault of a government agency.PVW said:The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stic by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
No outrage about the Elk River spill last year.
No outrage against BP, even, when that disaster happened.
It's clear that his point is not the spill. He doesn't care about the people or the water. He is only interested in pointing out the EPA screw up.
I assume you mean Yin. No, he's not. I've acknowledged that the EPA screwed up. I acknowledge all the time that the government messes up.
Perhaps you just assume anyone who hold one position in common with others holds all similar positions. I mean, that is much easier.
TylerDurden said:
I don't believe they intentionally caused this spill. That being said, I don't totally discount the letter to the editor. While I don't see any specific evidence of it, and its clearly speculative, I don't think its a giant stretch that bureaucrats within the EPA might be ambitious enough to angle for a Superfund project.
Am I to understand the Superfund sites are now becoming so scarce that the EPA needs to manufacture them?
TylerDurden said:
ParticleMan said:I don't believe they intentionally caused this spill. That being said, I don't totally discount the letter to the editor. While I don't see any specific evidence of it, and its clearly speculative, I don't think its a giant stretch that bureaucrats within the EPA might be ambitious enough to angle for a Superfund project.
Terp,
Do you believe the EPA intentionally poisoned the Animas River, as that Zero Hedge post you linked to accuses?
A yes or no will suffice.
To counter the obvious retort, yes, I believe the EPA screwed up. They are ultimately responsible for the work of their contractors, just as Secretary Sebelius was ultimately responsible for the healthcare.gov screw up.s
I don't see how you can say that you "don't believe they intentionally caused this spill" and then say you don't discount the letter when it clearly states that the author believes that a spill is the intent of the EPA.
ParticleMan said:
RealityForAll said:No, the point was that no concern about pollution of waters has ever been raised by that poster until it was the fault of a government agency.
PVW said:The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stic by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?
bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
No outrage about the Elk River spill last year.
No outrage against BP, even, when that disaster happened.
It's clear that his point is not the spill. He doesn't care about the people or the water. He is only interested in pointing out the EPA screw up.
There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.
RealityForAll said:ParticleMan said:There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.RealityForAll said:No, the point was that no concern about pollution of waters has ever been raised by that poster until it was the fault of a government agency.PVW said:The EPA does wrong. And then you are surprised that such wrongdoing is used as a stic by those upset by such failure. How would you suggest wrongdoing be treated (a carrot perhaps)?bramzzoinks said:It's funny, because although I've seen lots and lots of discussion among liberals (including the elite eastern type) about poverty, the rural poor, and native americans, I don't believe I've ever seen you express any concern until just this moment, when you could use it as a stick against the EPA.
Shows how little concern the Eastern liberal elites have for Native Americans and the rural poor.
No outrage about the Elk River spill last year.
No outrage against BP, even, when that disaster happened.
It's clear that his point is not the spill. He doesn't care about the people or the water. He is only interested in pointing out the EPA screw up.
I agree wholeheartedly. And I doubt you hate to say it 
RealityForAll said:The but for standard of causation is frequently used in negligence cases. As a result we must ask: but for the action of EPA (and their agents) would this significant failure have occurred. Answer: no. Thus, it apoears that the EPA was the cause of this failure.
What makes you so sure that this would not have happened (the pollutants leaking into waterways) in the absence of the EPA actions? They were already leaking at the rate of something like 500/gpm, right? The EPA has been pushing to clean up this site for decades but was meant with total resistance. What is the likelihood that had the cleanup occurred in the 80s when the polluted waters hadn't been pushing out for another 30 years that this would not have happened?
RealityForAll said:
There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.
I see many people on this thread who believe in the mission of the EPA saying the EPA screwed up here and should be held responsible. I have yet to see ZZ, yourself, or tyler durden admit that private industry bears any responsibility here.
TylerDurden said:
The predictable argument: When private industry messes up, they must
be punished and/or shut down! When government messes up, they just need
more funding. As if this happened due to EPA inaction.
The subtle difference of course is that private industry is creating the pollution, and the EPA is trying to eliminate the pollution.
Of course the EPA effed this one up. They'll investigate and do something about it.
TylerDurden said:
Arsenic is a naturally occurring element and exists in things like ground water, apple juice, etc. There are acceptable levels of arsenic in foods set by the FDA/EPA. I'm guessing the water supply in the adjacent communities had acceptable levels of these things. Otherwise, the communities would have pushed for solutions.
But again. The EPA took a manageable problem and created a crisis. This is the issue. I hope they enjoy the additional funding. I'm sure they will.
Nitrogen is a naturally occurring element and exists in things like -- well, everything. Particularly in the atmosphere.
If you were locked in a room with a high concentration of this naturally occurring element, you could console yourself with thoughts of how there are acceptable levels of it.
In the few brief moments you had remaining before unconsciousness and death.
PVW said:
RealityForAll said:I see many people on this thread who believe in the mission of the EPA saying the EPA screwed up here and should be held responsible. I have yet to see ZZ, yourself, or tyler durden admit that private industry bears any responsibility here.
There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.
Unless the mining company broke laws at the time and/or is still around in some fashion, I think you'd be hard pressed to point the finger at a private entity and claim they had some type of real responsibility.
It's been difficult to find much in the way of backstory on this. Or a timeline for what happened, from when the mine was in operation until now. If someone has a link to something like this (I'm looking at you, @ridski ), I'd be interested.
tjohn said:
The EPA obviously screwed up and people will be compensated for damages. The problem is the tone of people who somehow think the EPA created this pollution problem in the first place.
And maybe heavy metal seepage rates were such that a cleanup was not required. I don't know. And arsenic is by all accounts poisonous and carcinogenic.
PVW said:
RealityForAll said:I see many people on this thread who believe in the mission of the EPA saying the EPA screwed up here and should be held responsible. I have yet to see ZZ, yourself, or tyler durden admit that private industry bears any responsibility here.
There are many posters on MOL who write from a reflexively defensive position when their paricular ox is gored. These posters rarely speak out speak out when standards are violated by the home team (seems that the end justifies the means reasoning is now commonplace). Generally such posters save their opprobrium for groups which the poster dislikes/margimalizes/is offended by. Take your pick of MOL outgroups: those who dislike big government, police officers, religious people, etc. I hate to say it but Zoinks intent may not be pure but neither is that of many other MOL posters.
By "private industry" do you mean: 1. the mining company which was in business and then out of business before the EPA was established (or the Clean Water Act was enacted); 2. all private industry involved in the mining busines; or. 3. all private industry existing in the US today. Implicit in your private industry comment is your assumption that government entities handle environmental issues in a better manner than private industry. My understanding is that government environmental measures at area 51 (open out burning of chemicals) and SC nuclear facility have the most horrific environmental consequences.
So, if the contractor was working for say BP, you wouldn't place the blame on BP? Is that it?
I am not an expert on mining pollution and remediation. The people in those communities were aware of the slow leakage. I do believe the water levels were safe until a few days ago.
But that is despite the point. The point is that the EPA caused a huge environmental event. They screwed up. Its as simple as that. I don't see why people just can't admit this simple fact.
There's a popular thread on this site that states "Facts Matter". Some clearly don't. At least not to many around here.