EPA rolls back Obummer-era mistake
- Thread starter Walter Brennaneer
- Start date
Yeah that's great. I'm sure you can provide me a specific example, right?
Look, I would like a 71 Coupe de Ville in Sausalito Green Firemist with matching leather interior as much as the next guy, but there's no arguing the air and water are much cleaner today and that we are better off for it.
Seriously though...look at these pictures of pollution in the 1970s. The EPA did its job. I’m not saying that the pendulum didn’t swing too far in the other direction and that didn’t have a negative impact on business, but businesses left unfettered valued profit over he safety of both its employees and those who had to drink the water and breathe the air that they polluted.
Cleveland in 1973...
New York City in early 1970s...
Sulfur pollution from a plant in Alabama...
Who can forget that the Cuyahoga River caught on fire. That probably wouldn't hurt anyone...
And not just near the big cities...
And in case you missed good old chemical Valley...just a few miles from where I was raised...here is life in the Kanawha Valley circa 1970s...
Life before the EPA...those weeere the days my friend...
it should be noted that we have to go back 50 years for the horror stories. I guess you guys address environmental much like race....just keep it going even if addressed.
Are you even following the argument? Going back 50 years is the whole point. These pictures illustrate what was happening to the the environment prior to the effects of the of the EPA. The EPA eliminated everything you see in the pictures. Now Trump is rolling back tons of the EPA standards that brought about the quality we enjoy today.
Saying that we have to go back 50 years is like saying that showing stats on infant mortality from 100 years ago somehow negates the argument against vaccines. Your statement makes absolutely no sense.
Seriously, using 1970/80's era Polaroids and faded Fuji Film pictures. Oh, and they have been scanned.
Yes. Your question in this thread is a perfect, specific example of West Virginia education failing.
I can’t let this comment go. Hopefully you’re being purposely obtuse. Are you insinuating that the technology at the time somehow negates the evidence that pollution was a serious issue prior to the EPA? Wouldn’t that be like doubting the existence of the Roman Empire or the existence of the Incas or Aztecs, because, after all, the only evidence that exists are some crumbling ruins and a few aging chronicles.
When Richard Nixon created the EPA in 1970, one of the first things they did was hire a group of photographers to document the extent of pollution at the time and to have that photographic history serve as a baseline for measuring the change brought about by EPA regulation. This program was called Project Documerica and by 1974 over 81,000 pictures were taken that showed the extent of pollution in the US.
Here’s a link for more info...
https://www.epa.gov/history/historical-photos-and-images
As the link explains, the strongest 22,000 photos are recorded by the National Archives and Record Administration.
That’s 22,000 of those “grainy photos” that don’t prove a thing...right? In fact, 15,000 of those photos are archived online for public consumption...
https://www.archives.gov/research/environment/documerica-highlights.html
Herdman is just playing the part and having fun with this thread. But for the life of me I’m convinced that you’re serious when you make the comments about grainy photos not proving anything or no one has breathed bad air. I fight the good fight with rifle, but I can’t defend some of these comments. If you believe that pollution wasn’t a serious issue prior to the EPA, there’s a serious breach in that WVU education.
So, are you seriously contending that we will return to those pollution levels? The EPA needed a roll back. Spoiler alert— we aren’t returning to those pollution levels. Not even close
This article talks of Obama era regulations. Obama was not President in the 70's so take a deep breath.From the article, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler on Tuesday argued the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan -- the policy being replaced by this week's proposal -- "exceeded the agency's legal authority" and argued the old regulations led to rising energy prices which have "hurt low and middle income Americans the most." Most of us would agree that the issues of 50 years ago needed to be dealt with, and they were . In that case the EPA did it's job. The air is clean and the new regulations imposed by the EPA are not helping they are hurting us.
Last edited:
