Site

Categories

Discover and discuss the manliest content on the Web

This renegade agency needs to be treated the way they would treat any private company that caused a problem like this. Heads should roll and they should be fined out of existence. "Deeply sorry", my ass. Are you also "deeply sorry" my electrical rates are going up and the local coal-burning power plant may have to close thanks to your decision last week they will have to be 75% "cleaner"? Legislation by bureaucrats! This agency needs to be shut down and the rule book re-written.

6 comments

  • Malco187 5 years, 3 months ago

    Jake, where do you think all those chemicals came from? Are you under the impression that the EPA trucked in loads of chemicals to a mining site? Genuinely asking your opinion here.

    Reply

    • JakeLonergan

      JakeLonergan 5 years, 3 months ago

      Why, it was leftover sludge they cleaned out of the Nostromo, of course. No, this was stuff from the mine but I am going with; it was appropriately sealed per whatever regs were in place when the mine closed. If not, the EPA's little bureaucratic CYA mindset would have been to immediately point fingers at the previous owner. No, they brought this all upon themselves.

      Reply

      • Malco187 5 years, 3 months ago

        Yea that makes sense to me as well. I'm a pretty liberal guy, I get the impression you may not be. I appreciate you talking about this like a man. I truly believe 90% of the issues liberals and conservatives argue about really boil down to lack of communication. I think we have a lot more in common than we think and maybe, just maybe, a particular group of people greatly benefits from our continued division.

        Reply

      • egro 5 years, 3 months ago

        Wrong. That water basin has been without fish for a while due to the pollution, and much of that river has been an EPA superfund since the early 90s. Plus the breach was from a company subcontracted by the EPA, rather than the EPA itself.

        Reply

        • JakeLonergan

          JakeLonergan 5 years, 3 months ago

          Thank you for more facts about the story. If these facts actually had something to do with the outcome of the story we might even move them into the "pertinent" category. As it is, Company X was acting as an authorized and accredited agent of the EPA and so, for practical purposes, becomes the EPA. And the breach is still the breach, already being a superfund project changes nothing. But thanks for playing.

          Reply

          • egro 5 years, 3 months ago

            Nah, the point is that the mine wasn't "appropriately sealed" as you claim, it has been leaking into the river for years. We would be much worse off as a whole if the EPA did not exist. It is this agency that organizes cleanup efforts for instances where industry neglects to clean up their own mess. The whole reason this story is newsworthy is because of (1) the irony of this happening under EPA watch and (2) it is not common for spills like this to happen during typical EPA cleanups.

            Reply