EPA, Just What does It Do.

[OldCoyote]

After not faring to well on another thread ,  (Compare these two government decisions) I went looking at the EPA

cfpub.epa.gov/enforcement/cases/  

They are really good at collecting money,    Now just where does all that money go?

[weltschmerz]

switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/sslesinger/epa_spending_in_the_presidents.html

[Deleted]

EPA, Just What does It Do.

This is just a guess... but... I think they are the Agency that is tasked with Protecting the Environment... but they didn't want "A.P.E." as their acronym...



Just a thought...


ETA:  (forgot the smiley... wanted to add it so everyone would know that was a joke)

[OldCoyote]

Jul 13, 2015 0:37:56 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/sslesinger/epa_spending_in_the_presidents.html

This question was not about their budget,  What happens to the $ billion that they collect?

[Deleted]

Clean up and restoration...

[OldCoyote]

In this thread I was being some what positive about their actions considering my normal over government attitude.   

The rivers catching must be some thing that happens just back East,    I don't ever recall the Colorado river here catching fire.

[happyhoix]

Jul 13, 2015 9:07:59 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Fair enough Sir.

I don't think many rivers catch fire, even here back East.  

However the Cuyuhoga River in an industrial basin in Ohio was infamous for it, particularly one fire in the late 1960's.  (oil on top of the water I think) It certainly became a rallying cry for the environmental movement at the time.

it caught fire a lot. It was almost a common place thing, back then.

Had to do with fuel storage tanks along the banks of the river not having any containment. When the tanks or pipes leaked the stuff flowed on out to the river, where it floating in rafts on the surface of the water until something sparked it. They never got too motivated to do anything about it until the one in 1960 made the cover of Time magazine - that was a little embarrassing, I think. It led to the clean water act and the spill regs, which require tank and pipe containment.

[happyhoix]

As for where the money goes, I'm not sure. Possibly to a fund to provide clean up money for old sites, although usually the EPA is pretty aggressive about going after the companies that created the mess in the first place.

The fines aren't usually that big a deal for large companies - in fact, the fines for storm water violations for land disturbance without complying with the EPA requirement to avoid disturbing or polluting the natural waterways is often just calculated into the expense of building a new building - it's cheaper for them to bulldoze the site, move the dirt the way they want it and then pay the fine than it is to figure out how to legally divert waterways, install silt fences, etc.

What's becoming a bigger driver than the fines involved is a push on the part of some corporations to be 'green' - they don't want any bad press, and don't want their contractors to get any bad press on their behalf. Depends on the company involved - Walmart is actually very green and is pushing their vendors to downsize their packaging, reduce their greenhouse footprint, water use, etc. I would guess they would require their contractors to comply with the storm water regs when building a new facility.

[fairlycrazy23]

Jul 13, 2015 9:07:59 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Fair enough Sir.

I don't think many rivers catch fire, even here back East.  

However the Cuyuhoga River in an industrial basin in Ohio was infamous for it, particularly one fire in the late 1960's.  (oil on top of the water I think) It certainly became a rallying cry for the environmental movement at the time.

The fire on the Cuyahoga River in 1969 was small compared to previous ones, I think the fire was out before any pictures where taken and I think pictures of the one from 52 are shown instead, and it is actually mostly floating debris that burned.
What usually doesn't get mentioned is that the river had been get much cleaner over the past decade before the clean water act. In fact the EPA's first water quality inventory in 73 found that there had been substantial improvement in water quality in major waterways during the decade before the clean water act.

[mroped]

If you wanna see what EPA does and why we need them all you have to do is go to a inner harbor or just a harbor basin and look at the water.
If you are still wondering after that then there is no showing or convincing you.

[fairlycrazy23]

Jul 13, 2015 10:57:25 GMT -5 mroped said:

If you wanna see what EPA does and why we need them all you have to do is go to a inner harbor or just a harbor basin and look at the water.
If you are still wondering after that then there is no showing or convincing you.

So they make water?

[weltschmerz]

Jul 13, 2015 11:32:20 GMT -5 fairlycrazy23 said:

Jul 13, 2015 10:57:25 GMT -5 mroped said:

If you wanna see what EPA does and why we need them all you have to do is go to a inner harbor or just a harbor basin and look at the water.
If you are still wondering after that then there is no showing or convincing you.

So they make water?

Seriously? You're asking that?

[mroped]

Her screen name fits the bill!