Exxon Oil Leak...GOP wants top cut EPA?

[rdean]

Yes, when the EPA is mainly interested in politics and not protecting the environment it is time for it to go. They have done some good things but lately they are an arm of a political organization and ignoring their own scientists reports on subjects they wish to control. Hence, they have to go.

That's ridiculous. You guys believe any old bullshit. Every right wing talking point becomes more and more outlandish.

If the EPA is effective and competent, how did the oil spill happen?

Try to figure that out yourself. Seriously, instead of asking such a question, attempt some research. There is plenty of information out there. Don't rely on right wing "talking points". Try to figure out the timeline. Not from the spill on, but before the spill.

 

[Flopper]

The EPA is reactive. It takes billions to fund the EPA and all it does is make political statements after the fact. The pipeline spill was pretty convenient for the Obama campaign. I wonder if the EPA is as interested in investigating the cause as it seems to be in raising the cost of energy for Americans.

EPA coordinates oil-cleanup effort along river

Oil-cleanup effort grows along river

 

[code1211]

That's ridiculous. You guys believe any old bullshit. Every right wing talking point becomes more and more outlandish.

If the EPA is effective and competent, how did the oil spill happen?

Try to figure that out yourself. Seriously, instead of asking such a question, attempt some research. There is plenty of information out there. Don't rely on right wing "talking points". Try to figure out the timeline. Not from the spill on, but before the spill.

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

 

[westwall]

No, all states do not have an EPA. Most states have a several agencies with responsibility of enforcing state environmental laws. State agencies rely heavily on the EPA for support. In fact, many of these state agencies would virtually disappear without EPA funding.

Our rivers, air, and wildlife are not restricted to state boundaries. Pollution in one state affects other states. Migrating wildlife knows nothing of state lines. Environmental protection is an interstate issue and thus requires federal laws.

That is true and in those cases the States come together to help each other. Unfortunately, eventually, leftist loons get in and take over making all of the good work the organizations have done irrelevent by their actions. The Tahoe Regional Planning Commission is an excellent example of this. They were so focused on air pollution and the attendent degradation of clarity of the lake that they ignored that the very fuel additive they were using was carastrophically polluting the waters they were trying (supposedly) to protect.

You really need to get off of the "if you're a Republican you are ipso facto all for the destruction of the environment" kick because that is not the case with the Republicans I have worked with. They are just as concerned as Democrats are about the environment. They have a different POV of how to protect the environment. So far though, their programs havn't led to the poisoning of water wells all over the State of California. That is the Democrats fault.

A state works in the best interest of its citizens. Where that interest coincides with the interest of neighboring states, yes they work together; otherwise they don’t. If a large industrial plant pollutes the water and the air, of small towns across the boarder, the state may feel that the money the plant brings to the state is well worth a little pollution.

Elimination of the EPA with a budget of 8.6 billion, .2% of the federal budget will not result in significant savings to the taxpayer. The EPA, unlike most departments of the federal government was not created by Congress but rather by executive order of Richard Nixon. The reason the EPA was created was to reduce cost and improve the effectiveness by combining 6 different groups within two dept. charged with the responsibility of enforcing a number of major pieces of environmental legislation. If the EPA were abolished, the responsibility to enforce the laws would still exist and would fall to other departments resulting in the same costly inefficiencies that exist prior to forming the EPA.

The right has pushed to eliminate the EPA as well as the Dept of Energy, not for budgetary reasons but rather for ideological reasons. Both departments together cost less than 1% of the federal budget. By eliminating these departments, enforcement of environmental laws would be weakened throughout the country. Also, these two departments provide most of the federal funding for physical science research. This includes research grants to study green house gases and to developed non-fossil fuel alternatives, an area that most on the right would like to ignore.

You are correct. When an organization places political idealogy before science as the EPA has done, then it is no longer doing the job for which it was created. It now feels it is the tail that will wag the dog. Thus it must be abolished. It's that simple.

 

[Flopper]

If the EPA is effective and competent, how did the oil spill happen?

Try to figure that out yourself. Seriously, instead of asking such a question, attempt some research. There is plenty of information out there. Don't rely on right wing "talking points". Try to figure out the timeline. Not from the spill on, but before the spill.

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.

So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

 

[westwall]

Try to figure that out yourself. Seriously, instead of asking such a question, attempt some research. There is plenty of information out there. Don't rely on right wing "talking points". Try to figure out the timeline. Not from the spill on, but before the spill.

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.

So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

Sooooooo if his figures are correct and there really are 5 EPA people per county....what the hell do they do and why do they need so many of them if they aren't tasked with oversight, inspections and prevention...not to mention that protection part of their name.

 

[Flopper]

That is true and in those cases the States come together to help each other. Unfortunately, eventually, leftist loons get in and take over making all of the good work the organizations have done irrelevent by their actions. The Tahoe Regional Planning Commission is an excellent example of this. They were so focused on air pollution and the attendent degradation of clarity of the lake that they ignored that the very fuel additive they were using was carastrophically polluting the waters they were trying (supposedly) to protect.

You really need to get off of the "if you're a Republican you are ipso facto all for the destruction of the environment" kick because that is not the case with the Republicans I have worked with. They are just as concerned as Democrats are about the environment. They have a different POV of how to protect the environment. So far though, their programs havn't led to the poisoning of water wells all over the State of California. That is the Democrats fault.

A state works in the best interest of its citizens. Where that interest coincides with the interest of neighboring states, yes they work together; otherwise they don’t. If a large industrial plant pollutes the water and the air, of small towns across the boarder, the state may feel that the money the plant brings to the state is well worth a little pollution.

Elimination of the EPA with a budget of 8.6 billion, .2% of the federal budget will not result in significant savings to the taxpayer. The EPA, unlike most departments of the federal government was not created by Congress but rather by executive order of Richard Nixon. The reason the EPA was created was to reduce cost and improve the effectiveness by combining 6 different groups within two dept. charged with the responsibility of enforcing a number of major pieces of environmental legislation. If the EPA were abolished, the responsibility to enforce the laws would still exist and would fall to other departments resulting in the same costly inefficiencies that exist prior to forming the EPA.

The right has pushed to eliminate the EPA as well as the Dept of Energy, not for budgetary reasons but rather for ideological reasons. Both departments together cost less than 1% of the federal budget. By eliminating these departments, enforcement of environmental laws would be weakened throughout the country. Also, these two departments provide most of the federal funding for physical science research. This includes research grants to study green house gases and to developed non-fossil fuel alternatives, an area that most on the right would like to ignore.

You are correct. When an organization places political idealogy before science as the EPA has done, then it is no longer doing the job for which it was created. It now feels it is the tail that will wag the dog. Thus it must be abolished. It's that simple.

As I recall, this is same charges leveled against the Dept. of Energy, also on the right wing hit list.

 

[Flopper]

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.

So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

Sooooooo if his figures are correct and there really are 5 EPA people per county....what the hell do they do and why do they need so many of them if they aren't tasked with oversight, inspections and prevention...not to mention that protection part of their name.

Look at the EPA web site below. There are far too many projects to list. Click on a state and it will show projects that they are currently involved in and their activities. Most of the EPA people work on research, creating plans for environmental cleanup, specifications and procedures for inspections, reporting requirements, monitoring air and water quality, etc, etc... The EPA also has a legal staff and investigators.

The actual work of inspections, construction, and cleanup are done mostly by private firms.

The EPA employs about 17,000 people.

US Environmental Protection Agency

 

[cloudy]

OIL plus GOP, a marriage made in heaven.

 

[code1211]

Try to figure that out yourself. Seriously, instead of asking such a question, attempt some research. There is plenty of information out there. Don't rely on right wing "talking points". Try to figure out the timeline. Not from the spill on, but before the spill.

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.
So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

It sounds as if they set the standards, create the procedures by which the standards are applied, create the procedures for the inspections, certify the inspectors and review the results of the inspections to their definitions, standards, procedures and certifications.

When all of that is completed and the system is found to be utterly and completely without merit or worth, they then say it is not their resposibility.

What are they? Union employees? Democrats? Both?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

 

[Political Junky]

Bachmann: Elect me and I’ll kill the EPA | Strange Bedfellows — Politics News - seattlepi.com

Obviously grasping for the most conservative vote.

 

[Old Rocks]

Once again it appears Exxon was playing fast and loose with safety and the environment.

Yellowstone Oil Spill Cleanup: Exxon Operations Complicated By Rising River (VIDEO)

After downplaying assertions from state and federal officials that damage from the spill was spread over dozens of miles, Exxon Mobil acknowledged under political pressure Monday that the scope of the leak could extend far beyond a 10-mile stretch of the river. Company officials also said their statements were misconstrued.

"We're not limiting the scope of our cleanup to the immediate site," Pruessing said at a news conference along the river near Laurel, as crews mopped up oil in the background. "We are not trying to suggest in any way that that's the limit of exposure."

The 20-year-old Silvertip pipeline followed a route that passes beneath the river. It was temporarily shut down in May after Laurel officials raised concerns that it could be at risk as the Yellowstone started to rise. Also twice in the last year, regulators warned Exxon Mobil of several safety violations along the line.The company decided to restart the line after examining its safety record and deciding it was safe, Pruessing said.

 

[editec]

Exxon Says Oil Leak Mainly Confined to 10-Mile Area - WSJ.com

Yeah, that will do it!

Of course they do.

They complain that the EPA's regulation cost the nation $28 billion a year.

Why that enviromentalism is costing us nearly 0.2% of the GNP, just to protect our land, waters and air against pollution and degradation!

The horror!

 

[skookerasbil]

Once again it appears Exxon was playing fast and loose with safety and the environment.

Yellowstone Oil Spill Cleanup: Exxon Operations Complicated By Rising River (VIDEO)

After downplaying assertions from state and federal officials that damage from the spill was spread over dozens of miles, Exxon Mobil acknowledged under political pressure Monday that the scope of the leak could extend far beyond a 10-mile stretch of the river. Company officials also said their statements were misconstrued.

"We're not limiting the scope of our cleanup to the immediate site," Pruessing said at a news conference along the river near Laurel, as crews mopped up oil in the background. "We are not trying to suggest in any way that that's the limit of exposure."

The 20-year-old Silvertip pipeline followed a route that passes beneath the river. It was temporarily shut down in May after Laurel officials raised concerns that it could be at risk as the Yellowstone started to rise. Also twice in the last year, regulators warned Exxon Mobil of several safety violations along the line.The company decided to restart the line after examining its safety record and deciding it was safe, Pruessing said.

How funny is it this guy, of all people........is red highlighting "regulators warned........".

Bureaucrats.........like Old Rocks on his job..........make warnings all the time. Its called cover your ass. You can make thousands of "warnings", as regulators do every year and all you have to be is right once or twice and you're a hero. People who study bureaucracies refer to this as bureaucratic inertia. Identifying lots and lots of shit helps perpetuate the existence of the government agency...........or in Rocks case, his job.

Risk managers do this all the time in private industry. They identify and then some. Sooner or later, some poor fcukk is going to slip in the parking lot after an ice storm.....and the risk manager can say, "ahhhh.........told you so!!!"

Again.........identifying anything that has risks which are associated with inherent dangers is a win-win proposition. Think about it.........if you're a bureaucrat assessing risk ( thats what they do......WHAT A JOB) on a beachfront along the Atlantic and identify dangers associated with a structure during a hurricane........sooner or later, you're going to look like a hero. These people "identify" in area's where there is degree of probability of a problem developing SOMETIME. Identify enough, and eventually...........you look like a hero. In other words, the existence of the agency is perpetuated. Its how bureaucracies work.


You want "science"? The EPA's standard operating procedures as a bureaucracy? THATS fcukking science s0ns!!!

The hopelessly duped naive environmental k00ks think they exist as a bunch of do-gooders with noble intentions for the environment. Its classic liberal naive............

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[Chris]

Exxon Says Oil Leak Mainly Confined to 10-Mile Area - WSJ.com

Yeah, that will do it!

The GOP wants to eliminate all government protections on the environment, so the extraction companies can pollute to their heart's content.

That's why the Koch brothers are pulling the strings of the GOP.

 

[Flopper]

Do you mean during the months between December when the pipline was inspected and passed that inspection to the time of the spill?

My point is this: If the EPA is worth anything at all, they will inspect things like this and do preventative work rather than bemoan the FACT that they are incompetent boobs unable to do anything worthwhile while spending billions of taxpayer dollars.

They employ enough people to have 5 individuals in every county in the country. How could they miss something like this if they were doing anything that might help the environment or had any interest in helping the environment?

What does the P in EPA stand for?

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.
So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

It sounds as if they set the standards, create the procedures by which the standards are applied, create the procedures for the inspections, certify the inspectors and review the results of the inspections to their definitions, standards, procedures and certifications.

When all of that is completed and the system is found to be utterly and completely without merit or worth, they then say it is not their resposibility.

What are they? Union employees? Democrats? Both?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

We did. That's how the EPA was formed. Specifically what are you referring to that doesn't work and they are not taking responsibility for.

 

[code1211]

Before you complaint so venomously about the EPA, you might take the time to learn what they do.

The EPA creates the specifications and inspection manuals for inspecting all types of oil, gas, and hazardous material pipelines and storage tanks. They also review the inspection reports for compliance. All inspections are done by private contractors that meet EPA certifications.
So no, the EPA does not inspect nor repair pipelines.

It sounds as if they set the standards, create the procedures by which the standards are applied, create the procedures for the inspections, certify the inspectors and review the results of the inspections to their definitions, standards, procedures and certifications.

When all of that is completed and the system is found to be utterly and completely without merit or worth, they then say it is not their resposibility.

What are they? Union employees? Democrats? Both?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

We did. That's how the EPA was formed. Specifically what are you referring to that doesn't work and they are not taking responsibility for.

Specifically, oil spills. The P in EPA implies that the environment will be held safe from attack. The oil spills seem to be happening with some regularity. Why is the damage ongoing while the agency fiddles?

In non-oil related news, though:

I am personally aware of a site that has cost three companies more than two million dollars between all of them and has not been changed in way whatsoever due to EPA fiddling.

3 national Corporations. Company A wanted to buy the land of company B so A could expand operations. Company B decided to sell to Company A and move into a facility owned by Company C due to a recent acquisition.

B spent more than a million dollars on the renovations of the site owned by C and was shot down by the EPA after this much expense as it was suddenly classified as a Super Fund Site. In order to move into the facility, the facility would have had to have been razed, the top 3 feet of soil from the 40 acre site removed and replaced and the facility rebuilt.

As it happened, B, due to a different acquisition, owned the site from which C was doing business in this market and when the lease expired in that facility, B took posession of C's former base and C? Well, C moved into the site that B was going to move into.

The site is under the ownership of the original owners so the Super Fund Site activities need not occur. After an 8 month delay and a waste of about 2 million dollars in expenses, all three companies are doing business as they would have without the EPA interferance and the actual ground is not improved under the definitions of the EPA, but the cash and time have been wasted.

This is the mission of the EPA.

 

[Flopper]

It sounds as if they set the standards, create the procedures by which the standards are applied, create the procedures for the inspections, certify the inspectors and review the results of the inspections to their definitions, standards, procedures and certifications.

When all of that is completed and the system is found to be utterly and completely without merit or worth, they then say it is not their resposibility.

What are they? Union employees? Democrats? Both?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

If what they do doesn't work, isn't their responsibility and costs a bunch of cash, isn't it about time we looked for a different system that IS effective and maybe costs less?

We did. That's how the EPA was formed. Specifically what are you referring to that doesn't work and they are not taking responsibility for.

Specifically, oil spills. The P in EPA implies that the environment will be held safe from attack. The oil spills seem to be happening with some regularity. Why is the damage ongoing while the agency fiddles?

In non-oil related news, though:

I am personally aware of a site that has cost three companies more than two million dollars between all of them and has not been changed in way whatsoever due to EPA fiddling.

3 national Corporations. Company A wanted to buy the land of company B so A could expand operations. Company B decided to sell to Company A and move into a facility owned by Company C due to a recent acquisition.

B spent more than a million dollars on the renovations of the site owned by C and was shot down by the EPA after this much expense as it was suddenly classified as a Super Fund Site. In order to move into the facility, the facility would have had to have been razed, the top 3 feet of soil from the 40 acre site removed and replaced and the facility rebuilt.

As it happened, B, due to a different acquisition, owned the site from which C was doing business in this market and when the lease expired in that facility, B took posession of C's former base and C? Well, C moved into the site that B was going to move into.

The site is under the ownership of the original owners so the Super Fund Site activities need not occur. After an 8 month delay and a waste of about 2 million dollars in expenses, all three companies are doing business as they would have without the EPA interferance and the actual ground is not improved under the definitions of the EPA, but the cash and time have been wasted.

This is the mission of the EPA.

In the late 1980’s the EPA became involved in activities to prevent oil spills. Facility spills as well as spills throughout the US have fallen dramatically, half to a third of what they were 20 years ago.

Since the EPA was formed, we are all breathing cleaning air in our major cities. Over the last 35 years, Nitrous Dioxide is down 46%, Sulfur Dioxide is down 71%, Carbon Monoxide is down 79%, Lead is down 92%.

The cleanups of our lakes and rivers are too numerous to mention. The EPA website documents most of the major cleanups.

To suggest that EPA should be eliminated because we still have oil spills makes about as much sense as eliminating the police because we sill have unsolved murders.

Americans still seems to want a clean safe environment. The day may come that Americans will be willing to trash the environment for jobs but that day has not come.

Good news: air quality in the US has improved! « Fabius Maximus

http://www.environmental-research.com/publications/pdf/spill_statistics/paper4.pdf

US Environmental Protection Agency

 

[Old Rocks]

For people like Code, the health of our children is irrelevent, as long as the corperations are making the rich richer.