Bush's Environmental Policy ....sad or funny?

[midnight Target]

If ya make the river really stink, the fish will go to a better place! Then everyone is happy!

This is incredible.

The Army Corps of Engineers' dumping of toxic sludge into the Potomac River protects fish by forcing them to flee the polluted area and escape fishermen, according to an internal Environmental Protection Agency document.

[Nifty]

The Corps began the discharges in 1989 under a permit issued by the EPA, but the permit expired in 1993. The Corps was allowed to continue dumping under the expired permit until this year.

Come on now, don't be blaming this on Lil' Bush.   The permit was given in Daddy Bush's administration, and it expired in Clinton's administration.  The Corps was allowed to continue dumping under the expired permit until this year means that the Clinton administration is the one that let the Corps keep dumping under an expired permit!    I thought Democrats were for the environment!

[midnight Target]

Dammit, I hate it when the facts ruin a good rant! You're right of course, Bush inherited this one, but the logic behind allowing this to continue is still pretty funny.

By this same logic, if we want the salmon population to increase in the Pacific Northwest, all we need to do is pollute the Pacific ocean...to drive them into the rivers!

[miko2d]

What kind of "toxic sludge" are we talking about? From what I know about some EPA classifications, something as harmless as sand or clay can be classified as toxic sludge.
 Let me search the web...

 Oh, right - WashTimes
"The sludge is created when the Corps uses alum to separate sediment from drinking water taken from the Potomac and pushes it back into the river in heavier concentrations."

"... dumping of toxic sludge into the Potomac River protects fish by forcing them to flee the polluted area and escape fishermen, according to an EPA document.
... but they [fish] go ahead with their upstream movement and egg laying"

 They take sediment (sand, clay) from the river, reclassify it as "toxic sluge" and dump it right back.
 The water separated this way is used for drinking, goes through the purification plant and returns to the same river separately unless all the population drinks locally but drives over the watershed to take a piss - then it goes to the different river.
 Just as I suspected - a whole load of BS dumped on us by enviro-nazis...
 
 miko

[Nifty]

yeah, the logic is pretty fediddleed up regardless of who's mouth it's coming out of.  I just wanted to make sure you give credit where credit is actually due!  

That's the best part about being independent.  You can take shots at both sides and not have a care in the world about it!  

[capt. apathy]

....sad or funny?

??? does bush have an environmental policy?


this is as bad as when I worked at the chemical weapons depot,  they would read us the environmental policys/memo's at the saftey meetings.

  one of these memos said (and to quote Dave Barry-"I'm not making this up") - that all water and liquid waste would be monitored to make sure it was fit to be dumped in the local sewer system,  any that was deemed unfit would be used for dust supression.

so when I asked if this meant that the tank trucks driving around wetting the roads and parking lots where dumping not clean water but liquids not fit for the toilet so they could dry up turn to dust and we would breath them.  the responce was blank stares and red faces followed by "uhmm, I guess so"

so I asked if they thought maybe that had something to do with all the lung infections that many of the workers had.

that was followed by "no coment" and a quick end to the meeting.

but this one really cant be blamed on bush as it was in the clinton years.  just typical gov't stupidty

[midnight Target]

Miko,

You might want to explain to those of us who are not chemists how sediment is just sand and clay. I would like to hear this one also.

You see, I'm pretty sure sediment refers to all solids that may or may not be suspended in the water. A lot may be sand and clay, but it will also include any solid contaminants (toxics) that may be in solution. These are then consentrated and redumped.

Environmental Nazis are found on both sides of the issue.

[Eagler]

notice the increase in "allergies" ??

when I was growing up, I didn't know anyone who had allergies - now everyone, including myself has one type or another....

[capt. apathy]

ya, every one in my family has one kind of alergy or another.

I wonder how many of the sicknesses chalked up to allergy is just your bodys reaction to being poissoned.

[Udie]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
ya, every one in my family has one kind of alergy or another.

I wonder how many of the sicknesses chalked up to allergy is just your bodys reaction to being poissoned.

 Well I'll be 33 in August and I've never had alergies, ever.  This year, my 2nd in the Austin area,  I can't hardly breath and have been through as many kleenex boxes as I have my entire life before this year.

 I think it's the cedar myself, alergies go away when I go where there are no cedars.  Who knows though what could be in our atmosphere.  Don't we all have a "measurable" amount of plutonium in us from all the nuke tests?

[Nifty]

only thing I'm allergic to is a pollen that only blooms in the summertime.  

yay for me.  *sneezes AGAIN*

[miko2d]

Originally posted by midnight Target
You might want to explain to those of us who are not chemists how sediment is just sand and clay.
You see, I'm pretty sure sediment refers to all solids that may or may not be suspended in the water.

 I never said that the sediment in question was sand and clay. I made a note that I knew of some cases when harmless sand and clay (bricks) were classified as toxic waste by EPA - in one case preventing the cleanup becasue the private company was willing to remove the huge pile of sand waste from the state land for a reasonable price but did not want to touch the "toxic waste business" with a pole.

 Then I made a web search and found out that in this particular case the sediment dumped into the river was extracted from the same river. Whatever it is, how toxic can it be? We know that fish swims through it unimpeded to its breeding ground - according to the EPA.
 And as interfering bureaucratic scum that EPA is, I am newertheless inclined to believe them this time - since there is a video on the web by enviro-nazis of a dumping taking place but there is not a single picture of a dead fish anywhere.

 I am all for protecting the environment, but I clearly remember how enviro-nazis' lawsuit considerably delayed dredging PCB-laiden sediment from the Hadson harbor based on some technicality in filing the Environm. Impact Statement (not the data in it or any real problem with dredging) - all the while the waters were so shallow that the  sludge was constantly churned up by the propellers of the passing ships with PCB getting into water, fish, plants etc. - making fish inedible.
 It's like that - you cry "wolf" too many times, then when real problem happens no one would pay attention.

 A decade ago I would not have though to verify statements made by environmentalists. Today, the first thing I thought upon seing this thread was "it must be same crap, let me check it" - and it was.

 miko

[funkedup]

A good book for everybody, especially the environmentally hysterical, is Bjorn Lomborg's "Skeptical Environmentalist".

[miko2d]

Eagler: when I was growing up, I didn't know anyone who had allergies - now everyone, including myself has one type or another....
capt. apathy: I wonder how many of the sicknesses chalked up to allergy is just your bodys reaction to being poissoned.
 Do you know that allergies are problems with the immune system - which is by the way the second most complex system in creation after the human brain (in some of us, at least - in many it is the most complex ). Do you know that immunity is developed by exposure? Like, you get sick once and then are immune for quite a while or forever? Did you notice how immunologist introduces the irritating substances as a part of treating the allergy?
 Would it be reasonable to assume that immune system is not born ready but needs some kind of irritants to develop? That actual exposure to animals, dust and pollen in childhood may be required to develop a healthy immune system - not over-sensitive to common pollutants? Kind of like calibration?
 After all, the impared (poisoned) immune system would under-react and miss the infection rather then over-react - like with AIDS, right?

 So armed with that suspicion, you can look for some real data and find out a study that finds that in children living in the rural/suburban area that have constant exposure to animals, polen, etc. the incidence of allergies to animals fur, etc. is considerably (several times) lower than in similar children raised in semi-steril urban environments - even though the children lived very close to each other and drank the same water, ate the same food, etc?
 May be you will think the next time you wife/husband tells you "no way we are going to have a filthy dog in an appartment running around our children! And do not let the baby touch anything" that living among the animals and filth were natural conditions among which our genes evolved?

 Speaking about genes - just a few generations ago asthma and allergy sufferers, people with compromised immune system  suddenly stopped dying due to all those wonderfull antibiotics, hormones, steroids, clean water and filtered air and started having as many children as healthier people?
 Is it so bad for you, C.A. that your parents lived to have you despite their problems - even with your allergies - rather than dying in the young age before you were born?
 You should be happy, not angry. I may feel apprehencive about that because there is a greater danger of your compromised immunity genes getting into my descendants - but then again, I am partially color-blind and slightly myopic myself and could have been eaten by a bear (or my ancestor would) if we still lived in the woods instead of cities. So we both better stop whining and start appreciating!

 By the way, C.A., Eagler - were you breast-fed as babies or formula-fed? In 50th-60th 70% of women used formula - much higher percentage than now when the deficiency of formula (especially soy-based kind that actually hurts immune system due to phyto-hormones and elevated metal content) compared to mother's milk is realized - specifically in the areas of immune system and brain development. Could it be part of the reason that "everyone" is having allergy of "one type or another...."
 Of course having deficient babies is just a price we are glad to pay for "empowered" career-oriented women and "two--earner" families, right?

 Yes, we have some hormones in meat and herbicides in vegetables - which does increase risk of a cancer. But did you think how much more available cheap fresh fruits/vegetables become - and how effective they are against the same cancer? Especially if your organism is healthy from all that abundant protein you get from the cheap meat, milk etc. Check the average life expectancy if you have any doubt which influence prevails.

 I am not talking about an outright radioactive spill accident - that we sometimes get as a price for all the progress, but then again accidents always happen - you could have been kicked by a horse, gored by a bull, got lockjaw from a scratch or suffocated from CO of the primitive hearth/stove in pre-industrial times.

 So cheer up, gents and look on the brighter side!

 miko

[capt. apathy]

miko,
I agree with alot of what you posted and my experience will prove most of it.

 when I was a kid we lived in the city(up till I was 12) I had alergies to most kinds of dogs, cats, horses ect.

 then for the rest of my child hood I lived on a small farm, and after the first couple years most of my allergies went away.

however, as I expose myself to more toxins (as oposed to iritants and alergens[sp]) I've found that all my old allergys and many new ones are comming back.

I can particualarly notice this after working a fairly long job in, a paper mill or other plant that is high in chemicals.  after these jobs all alergies seem hyper sensitive.  while if I work a job in a more or less clean environment or if laid-off for an extended time my allergies go way down.

alergies are your bodys reaction (over reaction?)to contaminants.  my personal theory is that as your body begins to realize that you are poisoning your self it becomes- for lack of a better word- paranoid.  and over reacts to iritants.

while you can be desensitised to certain allergans, others seem to just get worse with continued exposer, and you actually begin to develope alergys to stuff you wheren't alergic to before.

one example of this is my mothers allergy to perfume.  at first it was just the perfume, and she would get iritated , watery eyes, sweling in the face if she was exposed to it,  then she had a woman hire in at her job who wore lots of perfume and sat at the desk right next to her in a room with poor ventilation.  the women refused to lessen the perfume and the company would do nothing (re assign seating, improve ventilation). she was one year from retirement and couldn't afford to quit.
after 6 months of this her allergys to the perfume where worse, no desensitising, and she had developed dozens of other allergys that had not been a problem before.  she had to work the last 6 months wearing a resperator while doing data-entry at her desk. and now 4 years later she still has all the allergies she had when she quit.

so while desensitising works for some, for others it just pushes your system over the edge