Republicans, Trump feel we don't breathe enough Mercury. We NEED more!

[Crick]

The original arguments from the Obama administration contended that the cut in mercury emissions they wanted could prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths each year.

From EPA curbs power plant emissions including mercury

Under the new rule, power plants can emit 1.2 pounds of mercury per million BTUs of energy produced. The industry had sought a higher limit, 1.4 pounds. But the EPA arrived at its figure based on a formula set out under the Clean Air Act, and analysts said the agency could not deviate from it. The rule would remove 90% of the mercury spewing into the air, the EPA said.

Companies would have three years to clean up their emissions of mercury, arsenic, acid gases and nearly 70 other toxic substances, and utilities could appeal for at least one more year while they installed the necessary equipment. Much of the industry has argued that the timetable is too tight and could lead to power outages.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found in an August 2011 report, however, that industry had overstated the effects of the mercury rule and others on electricity reliability, noting that many of the inefficient, 50-year-old coal plants were already being replaced.

 

[80zephyr]

The original arguments from the Obama administration contended that the cut in mercury emissions they wanted could prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths each year.

From EPA curbs power plant emissions including mercury

Under the new rule, power plants can emit 1.2 pounds of mercury per million BTUs of energy produced. The industry had sought a higher limit, 1.4 pounds. But the EPA arrived at its figure based on a formula set out under the Clean Air Act, and analysts said the agency could not deviate from it. The rule would remove 90% of the mercury spewing into the air, the EPA said.

Companies would have three years to clean up their emissions of mercury, arsenic, acid gases and nearly 70 other toxic substances, and utilities could appeal for at least one more year while they installed the necessary equipment. Much of the industry has argued that the timetable is too tight and could lead to power outages.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found in an August 2011 report, however, that industry had overstated the effects of the mercury rule and others on electricity reliability, noting that many of the inefficient, 50-year-old coal plants were already being replaced.

Is there an acceptable level of deaths?

Mark

 

[Crick]

I suppose it would really depend on whether they were your children or not. How many do you find acceptable?

 

[80zephyr]

I suppose it would really depend on whether they were your children or not. How many do you find acceptable?

Do you think we should lower the maximum speed limit to 25mph? I mean, it might save one of your children.

Mark

 

[Crick]

Do you think we should have no laws at all because they might have unforeseen consequences?

 

[80zephyr]

Do you think we should have no laws at all because they might have unforeseen consequences?

I'm not the one claiming this a safety issue. Lowing mercury in the environment might be a good idea, or not, depending on the cost.benefit factor.

Mark

 

[deanrd]

Trump EPA Says Mercury Limits On Coal Plants Too Costly, Not 'Necessary'

When coal is burned it releases mercury into the air, where it can cause health risks to people including neurological disorders, heart and lung problems and compromised immune systems. Babies developing in the womb and young children are especially at risk.

Trump proposal to weaken mercury standards could have broad impact on other anti-pollution rules

Reported emissions declined 69 percent between 2014 and 2016 after coal-fired power plants installed technology to meet the new clean air standards.

Harold P. Wimmer, president and CEO of the American Lung Association, said the current rule shouldn't be weakened considering it's estimated to prevent 11,000 premature deaths each year and has dramatically reduced mercury pollution, a potent neurotoxin that causes brain damage in babies.

===================

I'm with the Republicans on this one.

Fuk all those do gooders.

Clean air and clean water? Bah! Who needs them?

I just tell the kids it's not dirty water, it's chocolate. Drink up!

Bon Appétit!

I need far more information than this.

I love how you post a picture of something that clearly has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Here is what I need to know. How much in a difference in standards are we looking at? Are we going from 50 ppm to 60 ppm? What difference in health effects, over what area, are we talking about?

And how much does it cost?

If we end up doubling the cost of power, over a 10 ppm change.... which will have negligible health impacts.... then that doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

but of course I'm talking with a left-winger, so no amount of science matters. It's all pollution bad, and we can destroy society for it.

Well,
I'm embarrassed to have to say this,
I thought it was so obvious.
But OK..........here goes:

ALL Pollution IS bad!

I'm surprised you didn't know.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'm being sincere.........and trying desperately not to laugh.

 

[Andylusion]

Trump EPA Says Mercury Limits On Coal Plants Too Costly, Not 'Necessary'

When coal is burned it releases mercury into the air, where it can cause health risks to people including neurological disorders, heart and lung problems and compromised immune systems. Babies developing in the womb and young children are especially at risk.

Trump proposal to weaken mercury standards could have broad impact on other anti-pollution rules

Reported emissions declined 69 percent between 2014 and 2016 after coal-fired power plants installed technology to meet the new clean air standards.

Harold P. Wimmer, president and CEO of the American Lung Association, said the current rule shouldn't be weakened considering it's estimated to prevent 11,000 premature deaths each year and has dramatically reduced mercury pollution, a potent neurotoxin that causes brain damage in babies.

===================

I'm with the Republicans on this one.

Fuk all those do gooders.

Clean air and clean water? Bah! Who needs them?

I just tell the kids it's not dirty water, it's chocolate. Drink up!

Bon Appétit!

I need far more information than this.

I love how you post a picture of something that clearly has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Here is what I need to know. How much in a difference in standards are we looking at? Are we going from 50 ppm to 60 ppm? What difference in health effects, over what area, are we talking about?

And how much does it cost?

If we end up doubling the cost of power, over a 10 ppm change.... which will have negligible health impacts.... then that doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

but of course I'm talking with a left-winger, so no amount of science matters. It's all pollution bad, and we can destroy society for it.

Well,
I'm embarrassed to have to say this,
I thought it was so obvious.
But OK..........here goes:

ALL Pollution IS bad!

I'm surprised you didn't know.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'm being sincere.........and trying desperately not to laugh.

All pollution is bad? Then kill yourself. You fart, and that emits methane. If you really believe that we should eliminate all pollution, then shut off your computer, and never use it again. You are destroying the entire planet with your incompetence on this thread.

Or are your a hypocrite?

You people make bold claims, that you never practice in your own life. For once, it would be nice to see one of you commit suicide, in order to follow your ideals.

 

[Crick]

Show this post to your spouse, your children, your employer, your fucking priest. What incredible assholes.

 

[Andylusion]

Show this post to your spouse, your children, your employer, your fucking priest. What incredible assholes.

If you are referring to my post, it was dead on accurate and true.

The eco-hypocritical left, says that we need to eliminate all pollution.

Well maybe you missed the memo, but the eco-hypocrites have said that CO2 is pollution.

So I say, practice what you preach, eliminate all pollution... AND KILL YOURSELF.

At least the Amish actually live in houses without electricity, and don't own cars, and are certainly not using computers and the internet which uses billions of watt hours of electricity, to go around lecturing others how we should reject technology.... or pollute the environment. The Amish are a hundred million times more honest and true to their beliefs than one single person of the left-wing Eco-hypocrites.

So either practice what you preach.... .OR... SHUT.... UP.

Tired of trying to have an honest discussion, only to be surrounded by hypocritical mindless idiots.

 

[jc456]

....you are more likely to die by many other things long before you die of the EVIL MERCURY MONSTER
....watch out for that MERCURY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[jc456]

The original arguments from the Obama administration contended that the cut in mercury emissions they wanted could prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths each year.

From EPA curbs power plant emissions including mercury

Under the new rule, power plants can emit 1.2 pounds of mercury per million BTUs of energy produced. The industry had sought a higher limit, 1.4 pounds. But the EPA arrived at its figure based on a formula set out under the Clean Air Act, and analysts said the agency could not deviate from it. The rule would remove 90% of the mercury spewing into the air, the EPA said.

Companies would have three years to clean up their emissions of mercury, arsenic, acid gases and nearly 70 other toxic substances, and utilities could appeal for at least one more year while they installed the necessary equipment. Much of the industry has argued that the timetable is too tight and could lead to power outages.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found in an August 2011 report, however, that industry had overstated the effects of the mercury rule and others on electricity reliability, noting that many of the inefficient, 50-year-old coal plants were already being replaced.

yo crick, post up the number of deaths by mercury over the last decade.

 

[Crick]

11,000. Trouble reading?

 

[jc456]

11,000. Trouble reading?

I saw no link. still no link. post it up.

 

[Crick]

EPA curbs power plant emissions including mercury

Need new glasses?

 

[SSDD]

11,000. Trouble reading?

You are the one who seems to have a problem reading...you apparently read that as saying that 11,000 people died from mercury poisioning...it said nothing of the sort...

It said..

The administration said cutting mercury in the air could prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths a year.

It didn't even say that one person died of mercury poisoning...not even one... You alarmists are liars and you can't read...

 

[Crick]

Which is what I stated.

 

[deanrd]

Trump EPA Says Mercury Limits On Coal Plants Too Costly, Not 'Necessary'

When coal is burned it releases mercury into the air, where it can cause health risks to people including neurological disorders, heart and lung problems and compromised immune systems. Babies developing in the womb and young children are especially at risk.

Trump proposal to weaken mercury standards could have broad impact on other anti-pollution rules

Reported emissions declined 69 percent between 2014 and 2016 after coal-fired power plants installed technology to meet the new clean air standards.

Harold P. Wimmer, president and CEO of the American Lung Association, said the current rule shouldn't be weakened considering it's estimated to prevent 11,000 premature deaths each year and has dramatically reduced mercury pollution, a potent neurotoxin that causes brain damage in babies.

===================

I'm with the Republicans on this one.

Fuk all those do gooders.

Clean air and clean water? Bah! Who needs them?

I just tell the kids it's not dirty water, it's chocolate. Drink up!

Bon Appétit!

I need far more information than this.

I love how you post a picture of something that clearly has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Here is what I need to know. How much in a difference in standards are we looking at? Are we going from 50 ppm to 60 ppm? What difference in health effects, over what area, are we talking about?

And how much does it cost?

If we end up doubling the cost of power, over a 10 ppm change.... which will have negligible health impacts.... then that doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

but of course I'm talking with a left-winger, so no amount of science matters. It's all pollution bad, and we can destroy society for it.

Well,
I'm embarrassed to have to say this,
I thought it was so obvious.
But OK..........here goes:

ALL Pollution IS bad!

I'm surprised you didn't know.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'm being sincere.........and trying desperately not to laugh.

All pollution is bad? Then kill yourself. You fart, and that emits methane. If you really believe that we should eliminate all pollution, then shut off your computer, and never use it again. You are destroying the entire planet with your incompetence on this thread.

Or are your a hypocrite?

You people make bold claims, that you never practice in your own life. For once, it would be nice to see one of you commit suicide, in order to follow your ideals.

So which pollution is actually good for you? I’m just curious.

 

[80zephyr]

Trump EPA Says Mercury Limits On Coal Plants Too Costly, Not 'Necessary'

When coal is burned it releases mercury into the air, where it can cause health risks to people including neurological disorders, heart and lung problems and compromised immune systems. Babies developing in the womb and young children are especially at risk.

Trump proposal to weaken mercury standards could have broad impact on other anti-pollution rules

Reported emissions declined 69 percent between 2014 and 2016 after coal-fired power plants installed technology to meet the new clean air standards.

Harold P. Wimmer, president and CEO of the American Lung Association, said the current rule shouldn't be weakened considering it's estimated to prevent 11,000 premature deaths each year and has dramatically reduced mercury pollution, a potent neurotoxin that causes brain damage in babies.

===================

I'm with the Republicans on this one.

Fuk all those do gooders.

Clean air and clean water? Bah! Who needs them?

I just tell the kids it's not dirty water, it's chocolate. Drink up!

Bon Appétit!

I need far more information than this.

I love how you post a picture of something that clearly has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Here is what I need to know. How much in a difference in standards are we looking at? Are we going from 50 ppm to 60 ppm? What difference in health effects, over what area, are we talking about?

And how much does it cost?

If we end up doubling the cost of power, over a 10 ppm change.... which will have negligible health impacts.... then that doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

but of course I'm talking with a left-winger, so no amount of science matters. It's all pollution bad, and we can destroy society for it.

Well,
I'm embarrassed to have to say this,
I thought it was so obvious.
But OK..........here goes:

ALL Pollution IS bad!

I'm surprised you didn't know.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'm being sincere.........and trying desperately not to laugh.

All pollution is bad? Then kill yourself. You fart, and that emits methane. If you really believe that we should eliminate all pollution, then shut off your computer, and never use it again. You are destroying the entire planet with your incompetence on this thread.

Or are your a hypocrite?

You people make bold claims, that you never practice in your own life. For once, it would be nice to see one of you commit suicide, in order to follow your ideals.

So which pollution is actually good for you? I’m just curious.

If you ask the wrong questions, you get the wrong answers.

Mark

 

[deanrd]

Trump EPA Says Mercury Limits On Coal Plants Too Costly, Not 'Necessary'

When coal is burned it releases mercury into the air, where it can cause health risks to people including neurological disorders, heart and lung problems and compromised immune systems. Babies developing in the womb and young children are especially at risk.

Trump proposal to weaken mercury standards could have broad impact on other anti-pollution rules

Reported emissions declined 69 percent between 2014 and 2016 after coal-fired power plants installed technology to meet the new clean air standards.

Harold P. Wimmer, president and CEO of the American Lung Association, said the current rule shouldn't be weakened considering it's estimated to prevent 11,000 premature deaths each year and has dramatically reduced mercury pollution, a potent neurotoxin that causes brain damage in babies.

===================

I'm with the Republicans on this one.

Fuk all those do gooders.

Clean air and clean water? Bah! Who needs them?

I just tell the kids it's not dirty water, it's chocolate. Drink up!

Bon Appétit!

I need far more information than this.

I love how you post a picture of something that clearly has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Here is what I need to know. How much in a difference in standards are we looking at? Are we going from 50 ppm to 60 ppm? What difference in health effects, over what area, are we talking about?

And how much does it cost?

If we end up doubling the cost of power, over a 10 ppm change.... which will have negligible health impacts.... then that doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.

but of course I'm talking with a left-winger, so no amount of science matters. It's all pollution bad, and we can destroy society for it.

Well,
I'm embarrassed to have to say this,
I thought it was so obvious.
But OK..........here goes:

ALL Pollution IS bad!

I'm surprised you didn't know.

Anything else I can help you with?

I'm being sincere.........and trying desperately not to laugh.

All pollution is bad? Then kill yourself. You fart, and that emits methane. If you really believe that we should eliminate all pollution, then shut off your computer, and never use it again. You are destroying the entire planet with your incompetence on this thread.

Or are your a hypocrite?

You people make bold claims, that you never practice in your own life. For once, it would be nice to see one of you commit suicide, in order to follow your ideals.

So which pollution is actually good for you? I’m just curious.

If you ask the wrong questions, you get the wrong answers.

Mark

Do you deny that this was your question:

All pollution is bad?

So since you aren't sure, there must be some you question.

Do you believe mercury is bad?

Just in case, here is a little reading for you:

Mercury Poisoning: Signs, Symptoms, Causes, Treatment, & Prevention