EPA against clean water.

Post #38,086 by Silverlock 5/9/02 1:28:09 PM Reply	EPA against clean water. It's getting very weird when the agency charged with protecting the environment comes out in favor of pollution. Story [link\|http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-050902coal.story\|here]. Excerpt Just last week, the Bush administration rewrote the Corps of Engineers' clean water regulations to allow companies to continue filling valleys with the mining dirt, which already covers 1,000 miles of streams across Appalachia. But District Judge Charles H. Haden II in Charleston, W.Va., ruled that the revision was illegal, as was the corps' routine practice of allowing companies to fill streams and valleys with rock and dirt from mining operations. "The agencies' attempt to legalize their long-standing illegal regulatory practice must fail," Haden said in his ruling. "The regulators' practice is illegal because it is contrary to the spirit and letter of the Clean Water Act." A spokesman for the Environmental Protection Agency, which participated in the rule change, said the agency will seek a stay of the ruling pending an appeal. "We are very concerned about the economic effect on the citizens of the impacted states and on future energy supplies," said Joe Martyak. "We consider this rule an effort to establish a regulatory environment that is clear, predictable, fair and fosters good environmental stewardship." (emphasis added) K-mart. The company that beat Microsoft in customer satisfaction.
Post #38,160 by Ashton 5/9/02 7:54:52 PM Reply	..if you'll stop throwing cig-butts in out urinals, we'll stop pissing in your ashtrays. Is that it? I'm not sufficiently informed about the Corps Of Engrs' recent stuff to know what the trend is -- but invariably they manage to piss off some significant fraction of a local population, every time. But then, Appalachia has been the dumping grounds for lots of stuff that doesn't make the nightly newsfotainment - methinks we're not smart enough for this to be the result of a 'conspiracy' though (?) All hail the Judge.. but if the higher courts are as understaffed as I heard today - before the appeal is heard, they'll be calling it Appalachia Mesa, y'know? :( Ashton yeah.. what's all this PC crap about Clean Water! Some Com-symp tryin' to keep our immune systems from handlin new antibodies or sump'n?
Post #38,164 by bepatient 5/9/02 8:08:29 PM Reply	You do realize that they're talking about dirt. You dig a big hole and you need a place to put the dirt. They're talking in the article as if this is some kind of hazardous waste situation. Like my buddy from New Jersey calling this the worst thing to happen to the clean water act since its inception. Please...people...its DIRT. Also...being from there I can tell you...it has always been done. You take it from here...and you fill up the valley on the other side of the hill. The Judge is trying to make it illegal. He will kill the economy of WV and Kentucky if he does. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,183 by JayMehaffey 5/10/02 12:59:31 AM Reply	May just be dirt Mostly what they are talking about here is just dirt, in the same way the Amazon is just a river. The process in question is called "mountaintop removal mining" and it is exactly what the name suggest. The mining company removes the entire top of the mountain to give them easy access to the coal inside. That much dirt is a hazard, you can't just dump it in the nearest stream and expect it not to have some effects. The government failed to due their part in controlling the permits, and then tried to retroactivly rewrite the rules to let all the previously illegal dumping through. Until the rules are cleared up the government should be blocked from issuing any new ones. Jay
Post #38,185 by bepatient 5/10/02 1:46:53 AM 5/10/02 1:59:33 AM Reply	Well...it depends on what you mean by hazard... ..it would hurt if they dumped it on your head;-) WV has a very predictable topography in coal country....mountain, gully with stream, mountain. When they mine the tops...they push the dirt into the gully...filling it in. After they remove the coal...they take some of the dirt back out and rebuild the hill. It does ruin the landscape...that is certain...but in all my years in WV...there wasn't any problems with the water associated with mining (except for retention dams bursting...causing very deadly flash floods). There are some issues with acid build with certain types of coal. WIll look to see if I can find a study done on wellwater...but these areas are generally pretty remote. They make the middle of nowhere look exciting. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient] Edited by bepatient May 10, 2002, 01:59:33 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #38,202 by imric 5/10/02 8:55:58 AM Reply	Beep? It's not just acid build. The colored rocks next to the streams, brooks, and rivers are mineral deposits - and it's not just from the coal, but from the tailings, too. The red is iron, the green is copper, etc., etc. Pollution - and poisonous when the level rises too high... Imric's Tips for Living Paranoia Is a Survival Trait Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised... Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Post #38,215 by bepatient 5/10/02 10:58:42 AM Reply	Pick pick pick ...them cullerd roks sher r perty tho ;-) Historically they did just >leave< after the process...in which case there was always the risk of mineral poisoning. (whcih you pointed out in the post below) IIRC there are requirements that as much of the material removed be put back and relandscaped after the mining occurs. But most of these streams cut through these seams naturally also...especially when they hit river size. Cheat River/lake is green for a reason. It cuts through a copper seam. I know its more complicated than the >just dirt< argument I started with...but as you also pointed out in your other post...despite our best efforts to kill the place...WV is still a state with more natural beauty than nearly anywhere else I've ever been (Sedona AZ is #1). Over 100 years of mining hasn't caused any 'Love Canal' type events. And with the new relandscaping requirements...most of the mineral leaching is eliminated (not all). There's your trade-off though...eliminate the ability of the state to capitalize on its most valuable commodity because someone sees a technicality in the law to exploit...and garnering the attention of all of the folks from outside the region...who can then fall over themselves to talk about how "this is the worst thing to happen to the clean water act since inception."...and the NERVE of that guy...he's from NEW JERSEY!!! Home of the 5 foot aquafer and toxic landfills. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,193 by CRConrad 5/10/02 7:12:32 AM Reply	Kewl, first REVERSE 'due'/'do' error I've seen; intentional?
Post #38,201 by imric 5/10/02 8:49:40 AM Reply	Uh... Beep. I KNOW you've seen the dead rivers, streams, and brooks that occur from running through mine tailings. The mineral deposits kill EVERYTHING in the water. SOIL (the top coupla feet) is far different than the rocks and minerals torn up by the mining process. Further, I KNOW you are well aware of flooding problems in WVa. Happens when an entire state is on a hillside or the bottom of a valley. Somehow, I don't think that getting rid of the drainage streams is going to help. Yes, the economy is even worse there. Is your economic equation is money(NOW)>life(FUTURE)? I've always loved WVa, as you know. The state has defied efforts to destroy it - even after ripping apart mountains and staining so much river-rock with with poisonous minerals, it's beauty is STILL greater than most of the places I've been in my life. I also think the people there are some of the nicest I've met (as a generalization, of course) - and God knows that if the economy was better in the state, I'd still live there. My point - this is NOT the easy, one-sided, pro-mining issue you make it out to be. Imric's Tips for Living Paranoia Is a Survival Trait Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised... Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
Post #38,294 by Silverlock 5/10/02 10:26:33 PM Reply	I am aghast. Absolutly infuriating to think you would use such a simplistuc response. This article speaks to one of the major differences between reps and dems. Please try to find a cogent, applicable response. The "dirt" comment is laughable. I had thought better of you. Must be too many arguments with Brandioch. K-mart. The company that beat Microsoft in customer satisfaction.
Post #38,326 by Brandioch 5/11/02 2:38:32 PM Reply	Don't get me involved. After all, I've been involved in way to many remediation projects during my years working with NorthWest EnviroService and Phillips Environmental. I >KNOW< that "dirt" and "soil" and "mining waste" are NOT the same. Nor would I use them interchangably. But then, I'm not some corporate shill hoping no one calls me on my "facts".
Post #38,332 by bepatient 5/11/02 4:38:57 PM Reply	Cool... ...now I'm a shill :-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,335 by Brandioch 5/11/02 5:19:03 PM Reply	If the shoe fits, wear it. You characterized mining waste as "dirt". You've claimed to be in the environmental industry. That makes you a corporate shill. Please...people...its DIRT. eventually followed by: I know its more complicated than the >just dirt< argument I started with...but...... No, not "more complicated", your ORIGINALY statement was completely inaccurate. You are defending the practice with inaccurate and misleading claims. And you have claimed experience in this matter. Now, why kind of creature defends corporate practices with misleading and inaccurate claims that are supposedly based on his experience in that industry? A corporate shill.
Post #38,336 by bepatient 5/11/02 5:42:25 PM Reply	Read the other post... enviro-boy. As if the name dropping is meant to be impressive. The Help Desk guys at my company don't know how to drill for oil or make PVC...so...draw your own conclusion. I've made no claims to the environmental business. I work for an oil company. A >regulated< company. Deal with the facts. The facts in coal mining are simple. Overburden is >dirt<. Mine waste is NOT overburden. The first paragraph describes the material as dirt and rocks. That is overburden and NOT mine waste. So...it is dirt. The complication? Without a closer look at the revisions...it is not clear to me...from the article...that the rule changes are only about overburden. The Judge did use the term "mining waste". However, I also know this Judge. He is not as much pro-clean water as he is anti-mining. So I will reserve further comment until I research the specific rule being changed. If, after research, it turns out that the rule concerned overburden...then I will return and not waiver on the classification of..."Dude...its just dirt" You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,339 by Another Scott 5/11/02 6:14:52 PM Reply	Case is here (.PDF). [link\|http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov/opinions/index.cfm\|http://www.wvsd.usc...ns/index.cfm] - specifically: [link\|http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov/opinions/index.cfm\|[link\|http://www.wvsd.uscourts.gov/opinions/kftcvace.pdf\|http://www.wvsd.usc...kftcvace.pdf]]. It's an 83kB .PDF. Purportedly acting under the CWA, 33 U.S.C. \ufffd 1344 (\ufffd 404), the Corps has permitted surface coal mining operations to dispose of overburden waste from mountaintop removal coal mining by filling hundreds of miles of streams in Appalachia. Appalachian coal occurs in narrow seams separated by dirt and rock called \ufffdoverburden\ufffd or \ufffdspoil.\ufffd In mountaintop removal mining, the overburden is blasted with explosive charges and pushed out of way to expose the coal seams. The overburden, which is nothing but waste, is disposed of by creating valley fills, that is, literally, filling the valleys with waste rock and dirt. Because mountain streams run into the valleys, creating massive valley fills has the inevitable effect of covering and obliterating many streams and the lifeforms within. He does seem to be talking about overburden, though tailings are also mentioned.... Another story about the case is [link\|http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/virginia/dp-wv-mountaintopremoval0508may08.story?coll=dp-headlines-virginia\|here] from a Virginia paper. Cheers, Scott.
Post #38,342 by Ashton 5/11/02 6:55:08 PM Reply	Al punte - in second link: Excerpt: The corps has historically viewed excess rock and dirt from mountaintop removal mines as waste, while the EPA has said fill was anything that replaced waterways with dry land for any purpose. Both agencies have modified their definitions of fill material and the proposed changes were published in the Federal Register last Friday. Under the agencies' revised definition, mine wastes qualify as allowed fill material. Haden said the proposed rule "rewrites the Clean Water Act. Such rewriting exceeds the authority of administrative agencies and requires an act of Congress." U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone Jr., D-N.J., said Wednesday he would introduce bipartisan legislation to block the proposed changes. While Haden's 1999 opinion was overturned, his findings on valley fills have not been questioned by a higher court. The U.S. Supreme Court decided in January not to consider the issue. Emphases added. There appears to be miscommunication / infighting between at least two agencies + the inevitable screwing with Language for fun & quick profit. If the New Convenient definition of 'waste' is deemed to include now tailings! -- then clearly the matter violates both the spirit and the law: Clean Water Act. But with This Supreme Court, should it ever deign to reexamine this appeal -?- is there any question how it would rule? Ashton giving odds -
Post #38,354 by Brandioch 5/11/02 11:29:48 PM Reply	Make a buck now and poison land for the future? Hey, that's a no brainer. Support the economy BOTH ways. First, you have the money TODAY -and- You have the employment from cleaning up the mess TOMORROW. Now, the companies making the money TODAY will be doing their part by making those campaign contributions -and- The companies making the money TOMORROW will be paid off by taxing the rest of us (and they'll be making those campaign contributions from their profits). It's a win/win situation. Everybody's happy!
Post #38,367 by Ashton 5/12/02 6:16:05 AM Reply	Propose: world meeting of Corp CIEIOS and BODs of top 1000 Corporations [compulsory]: To be held on the new ship constructed by Ford Motor Co. in the old Pinto works: The Titanic II (It is so modern that no lifeboats are needed at all) While the meeting will be tax deductible, carrying insurance on the ship may prove uneconomical. No problem. Corps understand lean and especially, mean. Ashton Antarctic Elite Tours v-LLC
Post #38,334 by bepatient 5/11/02 5:14:47 PM Reply	Shouldn't be... ..reread the first paragraph of the article. A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the U.S. government to stop permitting coal companies to put tons of dirt and rock from their mountaintop mining operations into streams and valleys, It really does depend on what part of the operation they are talking about. There are differences in treatment of waste generated from mines. From that initial description...it certainly sounds like they are trying to outlaw the depositing of "overburden" in nearby valleys. Overburden is exactly dirt and rocks. And I can tell you that this is and has been the process since surface mining has been done in WV. Mine waste is a completely different pile of dirt (so to speak). If the regulations allow >that< to be dumped into streams and valleys...(a practice that used to be the case...and the impact of that was alluded to in my posts with Imric) then the dude from my new neighborhood might be right...that may be the biggest offense against the CW Act since it was written. I can tell you that this is not the first time Judge Haden has done this...nor will it be the last. He is a strong friend of the folks against mining in the state. But...in fariness...I should look more into the rules that were changed before I go simplistic...even though the "dirt" comment may indeed be the case. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,379 by Silverlock 5/12/02 11:08:27 AM Reply	Yes I should. You shrug it off with the comment "It's just dirt" as if that was the point of contention. I then see you saying (paraphrased) they are trying to makt it illegal even though it's common practice. Leaving alone the problem with that statement from a logical perspective, I read with a different understanding. They are trying stop the currently illegal practices and stop the Bush administration from re-writing EPA regs to make legal the "common practice" that just happens to have been illegal all along. K-mart. The company that beat Microsoft in customer satisfaction.
Post #38,407 by bepatient 5/12/02 9:58:43 PM Reply	Interesting The Judge does appear to have them on a technical point in the CWA that appears to be written to cover navigable waterways. These streams are generally about 1 to 2 feet across...not even big enough for a toy boat. HOWEVER...if the quote of the author of the article is correct...and the revised rules allow for the dumping of mine waste...then you are correct in saying that this is a very bad thing. The practice of moving the overburden and then replacing it is the practice that has been going on all along. We have a Judge stretching the CWA to challenge the legality of permitting. So you contend that its been illegal all along...I contend that it hasn't been...though the Judge would like to think it has been...but can only challenge on a jurisdictional basis...and on the qualifier of fill only being allowed for "constructive purpose". But...I'll grant you being horrified at the "just dirt" comment in hindsight...as there does seem to be some question of whether it is simply overburden being discussed. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,553 by Silverlock 5/13/02 11:43:58 PM Reply	Appeasement An honest difference of opinion? Yeah, I can handle that. You and I disagree on some particulars. That happens more often than not. My "aghast"comment was in regards to your "just dirt" comment while ignoring the legal argument. You cleared that up. I don't agree with you, but how often has that happned? As much as I disagree with you, I still consider you a friend and respect you for your unflinching defense (mostly cogently) of the republican philosphy. I just find it hard to accept that an itelligent, self-respecting man could follow that philosphy K-mart. The company that beat Microsoft in customer satisfaction.
Post #38,563 by bepatient 5/14/02 12:39:50 AM Reply	Ouch... ...while I do have some tendencies to "go repo"...I'm much farther gone than that:-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,385 by Ashton 5/12/02 5:33:14 PM Reply	Y'know Beep, despite your protests often of being misunderstood / accused of terminal pseudo-Conservatism, etc. I'd say the above thread is a reasonable average for your often terse = simplistic er "immediate summaries" [as with.. the female Army Officer being forced to adopt religious parpaphernalia yada yada]. Not a bad ink-blot test, that one, IMnsHO. BTW FWIW - methinks pseudo-Conservative is an apt descriptor for any folks what claim the label of "Conservative" (as if that explained anything, esp. Today) -- while steadfastly refusing to offer anything beyond the vaguest of hints about.. or "Liberal" for that matter - goose/gander. WTF they imagine IS "worth conserving" -?- and some examples of how it is that - there is no imaginable improvement upon the present implementation of that-Thing-so Worthy-of Keeping-Unaltered. See.. mindless 'conservation' for the nice sound of The Word -- is more like a 'Reactionary' mindset, as in that familiar epithet knee-jerk - beloved phrase of the Dittoheads and other purveyors of fine filth re any dissenting opinion, in the guise of "political dialog(ue)" (They can't even spel rite) You OTOH have no such excuse as the Dittoheads - 'cause despite the handicap of a Biz-Ad / Econ-oriented initial conditioning: you speak Engrish Reel Well. You just happen to filter-out with great regularity - saying WTF you might actually mean, except as hypothetical vagaries. Maybe this comes with acquisition of a particular rung on that ladder Upwards.. towards a subtle shift of the day's uniform towards ---> a real Armani! Suit? (just wondering) Ashton Hey! I had a suit once, too.. (Had to remove it whenever I had to accomplish any actual work though; finally just skipped the on/off cycle)
Post #38,411 by bepatient 5/12/02 11:00:31 PM Reply	It is hard to be humble... ...when your perfect in so many ways ;-) Seriously though... I'm a West Virginian. And what you are seeing here is a very small tail trying to wag one hell of a dog on a technicality in the law. The price of his success...the further death of the economy of 2 states with already high poverty and high unemployment. It helps that you can get the west coast media to cry about how the pristine land is being devastated...because those who have never seen the land will react strongly to the numbers (x miles of streams >destroyed<< all wildlife snuffed out) when the reality is quite different...with the animals needing to move maybe a few hundred yards over to the next valley with a runoff stream. Is it the best solution? No, not really. In a perfect world we would be able to move all of the dirt to a nice wasteland somewhere..then move it back...there just doesn't happen to be anyplace to fit that bill within a couple of thousand miles. So, what is the >real< choice here. To mine or not to mine. The consequences of not mining would make alot of people very unhappy when gas prices stay high and oil imports go through the roof. After all...something has to generate all of the electricty currently generated with coal. Let alone the impact to the remaining steel industry. Do we need to make sure that all of this is done legally and with as much respect as possible to the environment. Yes. If the rule changes include mine waste as fill...then they need to be changed back. The high sulfur content of the waste in these mines leads to very poor water conditions...and it needs to be disposed of in the same way as tailings (water born and collected in lakes)...removed from the site, classified as hazardous and disposed of according to the law. Any time you want to visit..we'll take a run through the mountains of WV...play spot the old strip mine...and I'm certain to spend alot of time listening to someone tell me how beautiful the place is...when the media would like to keep telling you about the >evil industry< turning WV into some vast wasteland. I am not saying that the mining industry would ever crack into the top 100 places to work...nor allowing them to shirk responsibility for land reclamation once the mining is complete (a requirement now that was not so historically)..and... ...yes, this is a pro-bizness stance...a bizness that happens to keep bread on the table of thousands of fellow West Virginians who would have NOTHING to replace that income should it be lost. There isn't anything else there...no "service industry" to fill the void...no chance to farm...get a job at the local factory...there aren't any of those things in these areas. For these people...without the mines...its move or die...and with unemployment in the high teens...even moving doesn't guarantee anything. I also find this another amazing example of politics in action. Bush will be painted as the President who single handedly destroyed the planet...but this practice (post CWA) predates him and his father by a decade. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,420 by Ashton 5/13/02 1:13:22 AM Reply	Thank you - That I can understand. There's enough to make some sense. Nor have I any reason to doubt your explanation of the consequences of filling in one of countless rills.. with another one practically adjacent. Hell, I'll even agree that the Press is entirely apt to focus upon the imagined "rampant destruction" - sans the foggiest idea of the er 'moon-crater?' aspect of that territory. Sounds as if you've seen the place.. We have no quarrel re awareness of what 'tailings' mean in the above machinations or any future ones which would ignore them. (via Bushie or any other entity). We can also see via -physics- how much energy would be wasted, were the Ideal Solution of "musical dumps" to be invoked for some PR value... {sigh} I may get close, too - whenever I can get act together to visit some friends in Asheville NC, where I will at least be introduced to the Smokies and.. Carl Sandburg's Connemara. WVA on list as possible swing, too. At present rate of airport madness - maybe drive, so have wheels too. Nahhh.. I have little idea of how effective are modern scrubbers VS the utilization of this hi-Sulfur content coal. I merely presume that this is a problem of the sort which Can be engineered around; if not - how many expen$ive auto catalytic converters will be cancelled out, for these jobs? Rock -->\|Miners\|<-- Hard Place :( We are supposed to be smart and anticipate helping ordinary humans to subsist - without also humiliating each one as a 'deadbeat'. Aren't we? We all saw what Maggie Thatcher's solution was: kill off the mines/miners (aptly critiqued in Brassed Off, an especially delightful pic IMO even for just folks like myself who love the Colliery Bands). Another 'unintended consequence': whether or not these bands can survive on their considerable virtuosity - absent the sponsorship of the parent org. Selfishly and from afar: that loss I'd feel more than I could be capable of truly empathizing with the stark position of the miners in UK. "Feel for" sounds a bit hollow in such cases. While being agreeable :-) I suppose I might add that - indeed I Can appreciate that 'bizness' is apt to operate in any legal niche as can be found. And maybe the above matters re WVA makes it clear enough that. often enough - a "dirty bizness" is an effect rather than a cause. This whereas, in the case of Billy and his Barbarian Horde of kids whose civics education was cut short - extra-legal viciousness is a purely optional aspect of manic-greed. So there are indeed ordinary businesses and then there are nasty bizness droids -- my lawful prey. Sadly -- all intermixed, both kinds buy our Representatives away from 'us'. So I gotta keep imagining that, despite the odds of where the Power resides: we shall either reform Corporate law or - the progression seems about obvious by now. Should your present Corp stray from Righteousness, will be pleased to lend you a slightly used lance ;-) Remember: as a local rep of IWETHEY - it's your responsibility to steadfastly keep them CIEIOs from fanciful lustings about Spanish villas (by selling the middle managers into slavery, say - or sending them to relieve the miners?). Y'know? Ashton Corrupting Powerful Machines since.. the Pinto.
Post #38,447 by Brandioch 5/13/02 9:56:08 AM Reply	Zero-sum vs equilibrium While being agreeable :-) I suppose I might add that - indeed I Can appreciate that 'bizness' is apt to operate in any legal niche as can be found. Think "life". When the eco-system changes, the inhabitants find a new equilibrium. The same with biz-ness. The legalities are part of their eco-system. As the legalities of what they do changes, the biz-nesses will find a new equilibrium. Not that there might not be pain for the individuals involved in the biz. Not that some companies might fail. But there exists the opportunity for NEW companies to flourish. Isn't it strange how you never see "Conservatives" trying to conserve the envirnoment? Instead, they seem to be focused on "conserving" the current biz-ness practices.
Post #38,466 by bepatient 5/13/02 12:23:16 PM Reply	Re: Zero-sum vs equilibrium Think "life". When the eco-system changes, the inhabitants find a new equilibrium. Or go extinct. As the legalities of what they do changes, the biz-nesses will find a new equilibrium. That is indeed the question. Where is that new equalibrium and what is the cost to society of attaining it? Not that there might not be pain for the individuals involved in the biz. Or the thousands of employees whose life depends on it. But there exists the opportunity for NEW companies to flourish. Unless those new companies locate in the backwoods of WV...see above. Isn't it strange how you never see "Conservatives" trying to conserve the envirnoment?. Care to tell me who signed the Clean Water Act, the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act? You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,468 by Brandioch 5/13/02 12:47:57 PM Reply	You make it far too easy. Or the thousands of employees whose life depends on it. Awwww, and think of all those poor blacksmiths who were out of a job making horse shoes. Or the buggy whip industry. And so on and so forth. Or are you advocating a welfare state where the government supports specific industries just so people who made decisions don't have to face the consequences of those decisions?
Post #38,470 by bepatient 5/13/02 1:06:11 PM Reply	Sure... ...change focus. Brandi remains on par for the course. Funny...neither industry you mentioned (poor little babies) carried an entire state economy on its back. Don't remember either of them being critical to east coast power generation. Neither of them would have been a blow to steel production either. And you call >me< strawman. Thats rich. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,482 by Brandioch 5/13/02 2:51:08 PM Reply	Just establishing criteria. You were talking about people being out of jobs. I gave historical examples of such. Now you're talking about power generation and state economies. And you accuse ME of changing focus? Now, if it is about power generation and steel production, a more expensive, less damaging method of removal would seem appropriate. Like I said, the balance will be found. Just because you want to keep the situation the same for poluting industries...
Post #38,498 by bepatient 5/13/02 4:25:31 PM Reply	Not Just trying to make light of a situtation that you don't understand by introducing nonsense. Now you're talking about power generation and state economies Now?!? You jumped in...why don't you try >rereading< the post to Ashton. Seems in this particualer thread I've been discussing it all along. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,502 by Brandioch 5/13/02 5:00:48 PM Reply	Let's take it from the top. [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38164\|You do realize that they're talking about dirt.] Yet you claim: Seems in this particualer thread I've been discussing it all along.
Post #38,503 by bepatient 5/13/02 5:04:06 PM Reply	Yawn Same, tired antics. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,579 by CRConrad 5/14/02 7:49:30 AM Reply	Double Yawn BePatient: Same, tired antics. Yes... From you. Christian R. Conrad Of course, who am I to point fingers? I'm in the "Information Technology" business, prima facia evidence that there's bats in the bell tower. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=27764\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #38,588 by bepatient 5/14/02 8:48:35 AM Reply	Can you keep up? Track this thread up. In this subthread. Notice I >DID< talk about those things that fuckwit said I did not. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,600 by CRConrad 5/14/02 9:24:22 AM Reply	With you? Dunno... But I know that you can keep up. You can keep up your constant habit of coming down on the side of Big Bizznizz, that is. No matter what the issue, no matter where and when it occurred, no matter who brings it up... Bill Patient will find a "reasonable, logical" reason to side with CorpAm. Sorry, but that's the way it looks: All I can remember from you, ever, is you posting in favour, defence, or outright praise of the Fortune 500 and the Dow-Jones Index. Sure, a reasonable, logical, non-fundamentalist thinking man, making up his mind for himself, must come down in favour of the traditional enemy of the Commie Leftist Pinko Scum, sometimes... And that's probably what you think -- or at least, what you will claim -- you are doing. But how credible is it to claim one is a reasonable, logical, non-fundamentalist thinking man, making up his mind for himself -- when one comes down Pro-Big-Biz every single time??? It was in that sense I meant my "Same, tired antics... From you". And I stand by that characterization. To convince me otherwise... Just behave otherwise, for fucking once. BTW, FWIW, the irony in the (mis-?)nomer "Conservative" struck me too, reading this thread the other day -- I remember pondering whether I should post and ask about "What is it 'conservatives' want to 'conserve', exactly? Because whatever it is, it sure doesn't seem to be the environment!" Don't you yourself see a contradiction in this? Although you would probably label most pro-environmental-conservation types as "radicals" or something -- even when it is they who want to conserve something, and you don't -- wouldn't the moniker for your view actually be more truthful, if it were something like simply "pro-business"? Christian R. Conrad Of course, who am I to point fingers? I'm in the "Information Technology" business, prima facia evidence that there's bats in the bell tower. -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=27764\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #38,623 by bepatient 5/14/02 11:19:16 AM Reply	Couple of things. There are nearly 300 registered participants on this forum. There are maybe 5 or 6 non-liberals. I have a tendency to get into these discussions because I find them fun. Without my participation...you'd all have a great time agreeing with each other...where's the fucking fun with that??? Pick the right subject and you might very well be surprised to see that I am decidedly ANTI big business in those areas. Microsoft for one. If I was all for big biz...I would be hanging out with the Ayn Rand folks telling stories and asking "Who is John Gault?" This issue is beyond big bizness...although it involves big bizness. READ...where it involves reclassifying WASTE..I am NOT in favor. Where it is dealing with overburden (dirt) I am in favor. So on this issue I both fall in favor and out of favor with the bizness. The real issue is the economy of my home state...which has pretty much nothing else to rely on. Especially deep in Appalachia where the mines are. Take away the mines and these people starve. In that case...you better have a very good reason to shut them down. Shut them down and electricty, heating oil and gas costs rise for everyone from South Carolina to Maine. Steel production in northern WV and Pennsylvania also close for good. Again, to do that you had better have a damned good reason. Keeping sulphuric acid out of the water table is a good reason. Protecting a temporary stream in the mountains of WV is not. In order to understand that you really need to know the land. As a description...this is what you get for about 800 miles...hilltop, stream, hilltop, stream, hilltop, stream, hilltop, stream. These are not full time streams either...just runoff...so EVERY VALLEY has one. There are alot of valleys there. If you listen to the knee-jerk folks quoting their numbers...you picture this wide-spread devastaion of miles and miles of land. This is, quite frankly, bullshit. If you ever get over here I'll show you. The real issue is this. A Judge and an Action Group are using the CWA to try and accomplish an objective. That is to stop this type of mining. >Technically< they have put forward an argument. Their objective has little to nothing to do with Clean Water. As for the >conservative< misonomer all you really need to do is answer the question I posed to Brandioch. Who signed those 4 monumental pieces of environmental legislation? And how does pro-bizness magically become anti-environment? Unless we all decide that communal living is the way to go...the 2 are going to >have< to co-exist. There are "radicals" on both sides. There is inconsistency on the positions of both sides. I don't know where the "commie pinko scum" thing came from...but where industry is concerned I CERTAINLY want to do it better than the former Soviet states, who have an environmental record that would make the worst US offenders seem like Mr Clean. If it is just a way of proclaiming me anti-government...then you get a B+, for I'm worse than most...but not as bad as some. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,632 by boxley 5/14/02 12:07:48 PM Reply	Inject some science here moving dirt from top of hill to bottom. The only pollution would be the traces from the vehicle moving the dirt. Same dirt on top, same dirt on bottom. Now if the argument is that dirt by its nature is a pollutant, then your going to die unless you move on a boat. Unless you have watched one too many Segal movies :) me dux thanx, bill TAM ARIS QUAM ARMIPOTENS
Post #38,643 by Brandioch 5/14/02 1:28:22 PM Reply	My observations. At the point where Bill "Strawman" Patient replies with NO references or facts or ANYTHING other than his usual non-comment, I drop the thread. Take this one, for example. It started out about the current regime wanting to re-write laws to okay a practice the EPA has not been enforcing. "Strawman" says "it's just dirt". When hammered on this, "Strawman" backs off and says it MIGHT not be "just dirt". Then he goes on about jobs and hurting the state's economy. When I point out that jobs DO end, he complains that it's about energy, too and that he's been saying this since the beginning of the thread. At which point I provide a LINK to the beginning of the thread (the place he said that he started saying it's about energy and state economies). At which point Bill retreated to his personal insults and non-comments. So I dropped the thread. Yes, you've noticed that "Strawman" >ALWAYS< comes down in favour of the government and corporations. Even when he has to mis-represent himself or the facts ("it's just dirt"). Hammer on him for referenced facts and all you'll get are personal attacks. This is his pattern. No facts. No substantiation. Claims of secret knowledge. Personal attacks. Not to mention the dreaded "Strawman". So why waste time right-shifting the forum. I won't say "discussion" or "thread" as there isn't one once he's reached that point.
Post #38,662 by bepatient 5/14/02 3:13:11 PM Reply	Hmmm. I'm sure you make an objective observation. Along the lines of trying to say that some mythical buggy whip manufacturer controlled a state economy..and the end of those jobs meant these people should "just adapt". The first paragraph of the article claimed the material to be "dirt and rock". So I believe "its just dirt" is a pretty apt description...unless you >need< the rock to maintain focus. An article was then introduced that questioned that initial premise...and said that the rule change may allow mine waste to be dumped. A practice that has been banned and should remain so...due to the circumstances that were discussed with Imric in one of the initial offshoots. I said that particular reclassification would be bad. Agreeing with the initial post that that would, indeed, be a significant rewrite of the CWA. Maybe I need to say these things specifically in order for you to get it...who knows. Then Ash started this subthread...which may be a problem...by not being so ever-fucking specific with you...I said the beginning of the thread...and not the beginning of this particular line of posts....which appears to be too complicated...because you linked to the top as opposed to direct line where 6 posts prior I did, as a matter af fact, reference the economic effect of your "just adapt" idiocy...before you even brought it up to "establish criteria" (laugh) With me so far? And you are one to throw stones about >personal attacks<. With me, those are reserved specifically for you. ask around. You, however, seem to share the wealth with anyone who has the misfortune of having an opinion different than the one held by our lord most high, Brandioch. And this is a fine example of you dropping a thread. Move it somewhere else in a fight for the chance to get in one more dig. Tired. Yawn. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,674 by Brandioch 5/14/02 4:29:13 PM Reply	Bill "Strawman" Patient. I'm sure you make an objective observation. Yes. I do. Along the lines of trying to say that some mythical buggy whip manufacturer controlled a state economy.. And you have just confirmed my reference to your use of strawmen as a standard "discussion" practice. The first paragraph of the article claimed the material to be "dirt and rock". Yep. You stop looking once you've found something that you think will validate your corporate masters. And so on and so forth. You continue in the same manner. Hey, Mr. Strawman, this is what "End of Thread" means.
Post #38,677 by bepatient 5/14/02 4:39:15 PM Reply	Oh... ...you can't invalidate any of it. See ya round. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #38,678 by bepatient 5/14/02 4:39:31 PM 5/14/02 4:40:35 PM Reply	there need not be 2 You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient] Edited by bepatient May 14, 2002, 04:40:35 PM EDT Expand All History

Welcome to IWETHEY!