EPA Assistant Administrator Bill Wehrum says the change will “reduce regulatory burden for industries and the states.”
That’s true, in much the same way that putting money in bank vaults reduces robbers’ economic opportunities.
I feel like I’m in a time machine that’s in a free fall.
Am I wrong…dont these people have to breathe clean air and drink potable water…do they have kids and grand children?
. . . while it drastically increases the health care burden on everybody else.
They really do seem to act as if they live on a different planet. Of course, in a lot of cases pollution is mostly limited to poor areas. But the global stuff is them too, and they just can’t grasp it.
Maybe if you marooned them in the middle of the pacific plastic swamp.
OT tRump is being protested biggley by the Swiss
Rolled back decades old pollutant laws. Of course they did . The EPA has taken WWSWD (what would snidely whiplash do) as it’s vision statement .
Is un-rule making subject to the same requirements as regular rule-making? Is there a chance for lawsuits about process or a congressional rollback?
Also thanks TPM for posting this. It’s more fun to talk about golden toilets, but this shits important.
“Trump Admin Ends EPA Clean Air Policy Opposed By Fossil Fuel Interests”
Cuz, f**k, who needs clean air? Losers. Am I right?
To paraphrase Yogi Berra, this is like Reagan Deja Vu all over again. I remember Reagan rescinded some US commitment to ocean vessel regulations against emptying the water used to rinse their cargo and fuel tanks into the ocean and saying “Well, I just feel when you’re way out on the ocean, you should be able to do whatever you want to do.” The Village Voice accompanied their article on his statement with a picture of him at the beach, presumably relieving himself.
Manufacturer’s become subject to certain industry-specific rules (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) as “Major Sources” due to their potential emissions of a single hazardous air pollutant exceeding 10 tons per year or a combination of them exceeding 25 tons per year. Once triggered, the rules mandate specific air pollution control technologies and work practice standards which are designed to reduce emissions of those hazardous air pollutants. In many cases the potential emissions will drop back below the 10/25 tons thresholds due to the application of the rule, yay for regulations! It might be tempting for a company to think they should no longer be subject to a rule as “Major Source” now that their emissions are so much lower. This may not make sense to you or me, but corporations think differently from us.
EPA’s “Once In Always In” policy requires a facility to remain subject to the rule even if the emissions drop below the level which triggered the rule because, duh, it is stupidly circular reasoning to become exempt from a rule due to the application of that rule. Would you release a murderer from prison because he is in prison for murder and therefore no longer murdering people? The analogy is actually pretty close…
That’s a very, very good idea. The part about marooning them in a oceanic plastic swamp thing.