Date: Thu, 3 Apr 1997 10:04:10 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: "Christopher M. Smith" <csmith@sdsc.edu>
Subject: Re: EPA Abuse -- It gets worse !
On Thu, 3 Apr 1997, Todd Francis wrote:
> Frayed1003@aol.com wrote:
> > Sorry to be
> > so negative, but I have always questioned the EPA's motives and for some
> > reason, it always seems that their priorities lie in padding their pocket
> > book rather than saving the earth.
>
> Right on! The EPA is all about money. We have been attempting to help
> air to the counties and states at car-owner expense. These are bad
> people!
I can't speak for the EPA's motives or the fact that they are/are not run
by "bad people". I do believe that when this bureacracy was formed their
intentions were sincere ... that is the protection our environment. For
example, the government regulations that really cleaned up our American
landscape (especially our waterways) in the 60's and early 70's. If you
think things were fine then and that things would have gotten better
without government intervention, then read Rachel Carlson' (sp) book,
"Silent Spring".
Unfortunately, with age all bureacracies succumb to a self-propagating
mode ... do whatever needs to be done to preserve itself. The major
problem with this is that the bureacracy also becomes cancerous ... that
is to continue to exist it must grow. In this mode,
when the EPA was done regulating coporate America, they turned their
sights on Academia. Not that I think that Academia didn't need a little
cleaning up, but the way in which the EPA changed gears is insidious.
Apparently, they directly applied corporate (users of large
amounts of chemicals) regulations to academia (users of small amounts of
chemicals). Big deal you say!, well here's an extreme example of how
asinine this approach can be.
They have applied the same rules for the disposal of 10,000 gallons of
100% ethanol (the "drinkable alcohol") to a pint of 100% ethanol
(generally used in a research lab). Obviously, you can't just dump 10,000
gallons of alcohol down the drain without major environmental impact, but
there is little, if any environmental impact when a research lab pours a
pint of 100% ethanol down the sink with water mixed in to dilute it out.
At least it hasn't been a problem til' a few years ago. No!, No! says the
EPA. You can't dump any ethanol down the sink that is above 10%. It gets
worse! Ok, we say, we'll just be sure to dilute it down to 5% first, then
pour it down the sink with running water (further diluting it like we
normally did). NO!, NO!, NO! says the EPA. You can't do that either. If
the alcohol came in a bottle (original) at greater than 10% concentration,
then no matter how you use it or dilute it!, whatever it touches or is
mixed in with must be treated ... disposed of as "hazardous waste". In
other words, I can legally pour a can of beer, wine, tequila down the
sink, but I can't pour pharmaceutical grade (absolutely pure) ethanol
diluted to 10% down the sink. So what?! you say, "just let the hazardous
waste people deal with it". Well, the hazardous waste bill somebody
for theior trouble. That pint of 100% ethanol that I purchased for about
25 cents, to do an experiment, is going to cost upwards of $20 to dispose
of. Who do you think is going to pay for that ? Our funding comes from the
National Science Foundation, a federal agency ... in other words YOUR TAX
DOLLARS !! So for every tax dollar you give me to find the cure for
cancer, I'm going to spend a majority of it on conforming to asinine
regulatory/administrative regulations.
Go figure!
And you thought we had it bad at the smog inspection station. This isn't
even the tip of the iceberg.
Chris
San Diego
(former biochemist, now computational biologist. The only thing I pour
down the sink these days is day old coffee. Ops! next they'll regulate
that as well ... all that caffeine, whoa!)
Mandatory VW content:
The smog standards being enforced are actually good for us. For those who
are skimping by with emissions, it makes them come around to fixing the
"problem". Sure it could be expensive to make the proper repair, but
that's one of the responsibilities we take upon ourselves when we decide
to drive our vehicles. Contrary to popular opinion, driving is not a
right, but a privledge (at least in California ... read the inside cover
of the DMV drivers manual).
A new cat converter can work wonders for reducing HC emissions.
|