Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
It is a state issue not a federal one. As a matter of fact it is a local issue. That was my point. At any rate, your post has zero to do with the OP.So if it doesn't affect you, then it doesn't matter.That does not affect me. It would affect me if raw sewage in another states winds up on my coastline or in the river I fish in.And where's your outrage about Caliunicornia nutbars allowing raw sewage in the freaking streets?The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
Fucking hack.
No, and Marty may be able to answer this better than I can, but sewage systems are governed by federal standards. So if the feds relax standards, it has consequences. This relaxation of standards would not have occurred but for Trump’s appointees at the EPA and his gutting of environmental laws. So yeah it is more than fair to blame Trump.Honestly think before you post. Waste dumped in the river does not stay in that city. Rivers flow. Think things out will ya. You can’t be that stupid.Last I looked waterways, rivers and lakes do not respect state borders. The federal government has to be involved.Why is the EPA responsible for what cities do with their waste? Shouldn’t you be screaming about these cities and states that are actually doing this? The EPA does not own sewage processing plants, cities do, so why not hold them accountable?
But cities are in states. You saying they can’t be governed by the states?
Gawd you’re an idiot.
Well the waste isn’t going to be charged by the Feds. The people perpetuating the “crime” are the ones running the cities doing it. They can be held accountable by their local jurisdictions or state, if what they are doing is even illegal.
This is yet another lame ass attempt to blame President Trump for something he has nothing to do with.
Almost all big cities in America are ruled by democratsThe Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
Listen more shit floating in the rivers where you live may be fine with you, but it is not with me. I don’t give a damn which political party runs a city, I just don’t want any city dumping more raw sewage in the waterways.No, and Marty may be able to answer this better than I can, but sewage systems are governed by federal standards. So if the feds relax standards, it has consequences. This relaxation of standards would not have occurred but for Trump’s appointees at the EPA and his gutting of environmental laws. So yeah it is more than fair to blame Trump.Honestly think before you post. Waste dumped in the river does not stay in that city. Rivers flow. Think things out will ya. You can’t be that stupid.Last I looked waterways, rivers and lakes do not respect state borders. The federal government has to be involved.
But cities are in states. You saying they can’t be governed by the states?
Gawd you’re an idiot.
Well the waste isn’t going to be charged by the Feds. The people perpetuating the “crime” are the ones running the cities doing it. They can be held accountable by their local jurisdictions or state, if what they are doing is even illegal.
This is yet another lame ass attempt to blame President Trump for something he has nothing to do with.
The Democrat run cities are the ones begging for the pushback of the laws, because of the enormous costs. Take it up with your Dem mayors, asshole.
Thanks for proving the veracity of the article. Delaying the upgrades means more raw sewage in the rivers. Over the years as these systems age and breakdown more sewage will flow into the waterways unless upgrades are undertaken.The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
This is about rules regarding combined sewer overflows, and a lot of the cities getting relief from this are democrat controlled, large old urban centers. They will still have to upgrade their systems, but they will have more time and flexibility to meet the requirements, not ignore the requirements.
I work in wastewater engineering, so I know more about this than you do.
You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.The EPA roll back speaks for itself. It is expensive to update the infrastructure however there are others ways of dealing with sewer systems than allowing more raw sewage into our waterways.I am sure states have laws against that. If not, they should.
Its always good to roll back federal power when they stole it to begin with.
Nice plagiarism there.
This trend is yet another example of the administration’s deregulatory agenda threatening our natural resources and public health,” said Becky Hammer, deputy director for federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If cities face genuine cost concerns, there are other methods to maintain affordability while still keeping sewage out of our lakes and rivers.”
Its laughable for you to think that trump is mandating that democrat party cesspools must dump their raw sewage into local riversNo, and Marty may be able to answer this better than I can, but sewage systems are governed by federal standards. So if the feds relax standards, it has consequences. This relaxation of standards would not have occurred but for Trump’s appointees at the EPA and his gutting of environmental laws. So yeah it is more than fair to blame Trump.Honestly think before you post. Waste dumped in the river does not stay in that city. Rivers flow. Think things out will ya. You can’t be that stupid.Last I looked waterways, rivers and lakes do not respect state borders. The federal government has to be involved.Why is the EPA responsible for what cities do with their waste? Shouldn’t you be screaming about these cities and states that are actually doing this? The EPA does not own sewage processing plants, cities do, so why not hold them accountable?
But cities are in states. You saying they can’t be governed by the states?
Gawd you’re an idiot.
Well the waste isn’t going to be charged by the Feds. The people perpetuating the “crime” are the ones running the cities doing it. They can be held accountable by their local jurisdictions or state, if what they are doing is even illegal.
This is yet another lame ass attempt to blame President Trump for something he has nothing to do with.
No, and Marty may be able to answer this better than I can, but sewage systems are governed by federal standards. So if the feds relax standards, it has consequences. This relaxation of standards would not have occurred but for Trump’s appointees at the EPA and his gutting of environmental laws. So yeah it is more than fair to blame Trump.Honestly think before you post. Waste dumped in the river does not stay in that city. Rivers flow. Think things out will ya. You can’t be that stupid.Last I looked waterways, rivers and lakes do not respect state borders. The federal government has to be involved.Why is the EPA responsible for what cities do with their waste? Shouldn’t you be screaming about these cities and states that are actually doing this? The EPA does not own sewage processing plants, cities do, so why not hold them accountable?
But cities are in states. You saying they can’t be governed by the states?
Gawd you’re an idiot.
Well the waste isn’t going to be charged by the Feds. The people perpetuating the “crime” are the ones running the cities doing it. They can be held accountable by their local jurisdictions or state, if what they are doing is even illegal.
This is yet another lame ass attempt to blame President Trump for something he has nothing to do with.
It is not a plagiarism to take someone’s thought and incorporate it into your post. My post was far from a word for word coping of the NYT’s quote. There was an initial link to the article for all to read as well.You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.The EPA roll back speaks for itself. It is expensive to update the infrastructure however there are others ways of dealing with sewer systems than allowing more raw sewage into our waterways.I am sure states have laws against that. If not, they should.
Its always good to roll back federal power when they stole it to begin with.
Nice plagiarism there.
This trend is yet another example of the administration’s deregulatory agenda threatening our natural resources and public health,” said Becky Hammer, deputy director for federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If cities face genuine cost concerns, there are other methods to maintain affordability while still keeping sewage out of our lakes and rivers.”
You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.
Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.Thanks for proving the veracity of the article. Delaying the upgrades means more raw sewage in the rivers. Over the years as these systems age and breakdown more sewage will flow into the waterways unless upgrades are undertaken.The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
This is about rules regarding combined sewer overflows, and a lot of the cities getting relief from this are democrat controlled, large old urban centers. They will still have to upgrade their systems, but they will have more time and flexibility to meet the requirements, not ignore the requirements.
I work in wastewater engineering, so I know more about this than you do.
The work required to fix this isn't something that can happen overnight. The only real fix is to dig up every single street and separate the lines into sanitary sewer lines, and storm sewer lines. The other option is to build storage facilities that would be 10's or 100's of millions of gallons in size to contain even a moderate sized rainfall.
The even worse option is to size wastewater plants to handle the whole flow, which would make them 10 times the size they are now, and would make them inefficient to handle the normal "dry" flow that they would be designed for.
"Green" solutions, such as permeable soil, bioswales, rainwater use, and other reduction techniques can't be scaled up to meet the requirements of rainfall normally seen.
The article is biased, but at least gives the other side. Your post is disingenuous at best, and willfully ignorant at worst.
It is not a plagiarism to take someone’s thought and incorporate it into your post. My post was far from a word for word coping of the NYT’s quote. There was an initial link to the article for all to read as well.You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.The EPA roll back speaks for itself. It is expensive to update the infrastructure however there are others ways of dealing with sewer systems than allowing more raw sewage into our waterways.I am sure states have laws against that. If not, they should.
Its always good to roll back federal power when they stole it to begin with.
Nice plagiarism there.
This trend is yet another example of the administration’s deregulatory agenda threatening our natural resources and public health,” said Becky Hammer, deputy director for federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If cities face genuine cost concerns, there are other methods to maintain affordability while still keeping sewage out of our lakes and rivers.”
You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.
Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.Thanks for proving the veracity of the article. Delaying the upgrades means more raw sewage in the rivers. Over the years as these systems age and breakdown more sewage will flow into the waterways unless upgrades are undertaken.The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
This is about rules regarding combined sewer overflows, and a lot of the cities getting relief from this are democrat controlled, large old urban centers. They will still have to upgrade their systems, but they will have more time and flexibility to meet the requirements, not ignore the requirements.
I work in wastewater engineering, so I know more about this than you do.
The work required to fix this isn't something that can happen overnight. The only real fix is to dig up every single street and separate the lines into sanitary sewer lines, and storm sewer lines. The other option is to build storage facilities that would be 10's or 100's of millions of gallons in size to contain even a moderate sized rainfall.
The even worse option is to size wastewater plants to handle the whole flow, which would make them 10 times the size they are now, and would make them inefficient to handle the normal "dry" flow that they would be designed for.
"Green" solutions, such as permeable soil, bioswales, rainwater use, and other reduction techniques can't be scaled up to meet the requirements of rainfall normally seen.
The article is biased, but at least gives the other side. Your post is disingenuous at best, and willfully ignorant at worst.
Surely liberal urban America would not allow for such a thing.The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
Once again you need to review a definition if plagiarism. Be that as it may, it is a ridiculously silly argument to make in an Internet forum. I’ll leave it at that.It is not a plagiarism to take someone’s thought and incorporate it into your post. My post was far from a word for word coping of the NYT’s quote. There was an initial link to the article for all to read as well.You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.The EPA roll back speaks for itself. It is expensive to update the infrastructure however there are others ways of dealing with sewer systems than allowing more raw sewage into our waterways.
Nice plagiarism there.
This trend is yet another example of the administration’s deregulatory agenda threatening our natural resources and public health,” said Becky Hammer, deputy director for federal water policy at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If cities face genuine cost concerns, there are other methods to maintain affordability while still keeping sewage out of our lakes and rivers.”
You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.
You are on the line here, you took her thought and represented it as your own.
Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.Thanks for proving the veracity of the article. Delaying the upgrades means more raw sewage in the rivers. Over the years as these systems age and breakdown more sewage will flow into the waterways unless upgrades are undertaken.The Environmental Protection Agency has made it easier for cities to keep dumping raw sewage into rivers by letting them delay or otherwise change federally imposed fixes to their sewer systems, according to interviews with local officials, water utilities and their lobbyists.
E.P.A. Is Letting Cities Dump More Raw Sewage Into Rivers for Years to Come
*******************
Trump’s EPA is allowing this change because Trump supporters seemingly want more raw sewage in their rivers and waterways.
Trump supporter mantra: all environmental regulations bad.
Here is the consequence of that ignorance.
This is about rules regarding combined sewer overflows, and a lot of the cities getting relief from this are democrat controlled, large old urban centers. They will still have to upgrade their systems, but they will have more time and flexibility to meet the requirements, not ignore the requirements.
I work in wastewater engineering, so I know more about this than you do.
The work required to fix this isn't something that can happen overnight. The only real fix is to dig up every single street and separate the lines into sanitary sewer lines, and storm sewer lines. The other option is to build storage facilities that would be 10's or 100's of millions of gallons in size to contain even a moderate sized rainfall.
The even worse option is to size wastewater plants to handle the whole flow, which would make them 10 times the size they are now, and would make them inefficient to handle the normal "dry" flow that they would be designed for.
"Green" solutions, such as permeable soil, bioswales, rainwater use, and other reduction techniques can't be scaled up to meet the requirements of rainfall normally seen.
The article is biased, but at least gives the other side. Your post is disingenuous at best, and willfully ignorant at worst.
You scandalized it to skew to your viewpoint. You exaggerated the scale of the issue, and you made it seem like this hasn't been going on for decades already.
Once again you need to review a definition if plagiarism. Be that as it may, it is a ridiculously silly argument to make in an Internet forum. I’ll leave it at that.It is not a plagiarism to take someone’s thought and incorporate it into your post. My post was far from a word for word coping of the NYT’s quote. There was an initial link to the article for all to read as well.You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.Nice plagiarism there.
You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.
You are on the line here, you took her thought and represented it as your own.