Trump’s EPA allowing cities to dump more raw sewage in rivers.

[theHawk]

Funny how these cities listed doing this are run by Democrats, but it’s President Trump’s fault.

 

[Polishprince]

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.

Cutting cities some slack as they make updates in their infrastructure seems like a reasonable idea, actually.

Its expensive as hell to get new sewage lines built, much less on an unrealistic timetable.
Urban rivers are traditionally full of all kinds of industrial and mine runoff as well as bodies dumped their by local members of the La Cosa Nostra too. Not exactly crystal clean streams. Reasonable delays in new sewers is reasonable

 

[JLW]

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.

And where's your outrage about Caliunicornia nutbars allowing raw sewage in the freaking streets?

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.

So if it doesn't affect you, then it doesn't matter.

Fucking hack.

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.

 

[JLW]

Funny how these cities listed doing this are run by Democrats, but it’s President Trump’s fault.

See post 20.

 

[theHawk]

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

[Mac-7]

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.

Almost all big cities in America are ruled by democrats

Dont you trust your own democrat politicians?

 

[JLW]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

 

[martybegan]

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.

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 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.

 

[martybegan]

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.

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 need to look up the definition of plagiarism.

You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.

 

[Mac-7]

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?

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.

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.

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.

Its laughable for you to think that trump is mandating that democrat party cesspools must dump their raw sewage into local rivers

the liberal democrat big cities are always free to upgrade their sewage systems

 

[martybegan]

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?

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.

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.

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.

discharges are governed by federal minimums, usually the States themselves set the actual discharge limits, which usually are based on dry weather flows, not storm flows. Storm flows are also regulated by the States, based on federal minimum standards.

Again, most of the cities asking for relief are run by democrats. Who is more to blame, the people asking permission or the ones giving it?

The updated standards were not going to be met. The work involved is too large in scale, and to expensive.

Maybe if dem cities worried more about infrastructure and less about plastic bag bans and giving money away to the homeless they would have more money for these upgrades.

 

[JLW]

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.

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 need to look up the definition of plagiarism.

You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.

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.

 

[JLW]

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.

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 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.

Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.

 

[martybegan]

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.

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 need to look up the definition of plagiarism.

You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.

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 are on the line here, you took her thought and represented it as your own.

 

[martybegan]

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.

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 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.

Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.

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.

 

[Meathead]

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.

Surely liberal urban America would not allow for such a thing.

 

[JLW]

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 need to look up the definition of plagiarism.

You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.

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 are on the line here, you took her thought and represented it as your own.

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.

 

[JLW]

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.

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 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.

Which is why I posted to the link because it gave both sides. The first sentence of my initial post said it all.

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.

The fact is you confirmed the accuracy of the NYT’s article. The rest of your posts have been nothing but deflection since.

 

[SmokeALib]

So, who again, is allowing the dumping of Democrats into our rivers?

 

[martybegan]

Nice plagiarism there.

You need to look up the definition of plagiarism.

You took her statement, added a few mods, and just spewed it out as your own.

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 are on the line here, you took her thought and represented it as your own.

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.

Up to you to decide if you want to modify the statement or not.