“Well, hey, as long as it’s a safe level of pollution, all is well.”
Well, I think Wolfie is just poking fun, and is, well, just being facetious as well.
A little bit of both. Make no mistake, I’m on the side of the industry on this point. Presumably, the residents did notice a change in their water (cloudier and smellier), but if tests prove levels are safe, then it’s small price for them to pay for our energy needs. The idea that we’re going to have pristine water and air was nice, but we live in a global economy now, where our competitors citizens don’t or can’t demand that. To compete with that, quality of life has to be adjusted. Of course, it’s not my water, but there ya go.
Many years ago, I asked a DEP representative in PA why the potential of more than 50 gallons of diesel fuel spilled was a HAZMAT indecent but we used tar and oil compounds by the hundreds of gallons per mile to build roads. It was interesting to watch his answer. The simple answer revolves in that oil recedes to tar and tar is an emulsifier so the diesel is an immediate threat. I guess he failed 10th grade Chemistry because he did not have a clue.
I almost created an anti-road movement at the meeting. My real question involved whether a simple application of a bonding agent to a small spill would be a better response than stirring the spill into the ground. It was a moment upon reflection that I recognized where liberals are evil. They know the answers their legions are susceptible to but yet propagate ignorance so they can lead the ignorant.