Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 207

Thread: The Overbearing EPA

  1. #121
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Overbearing EPA


    Greens Press EPA To Revoke 'Outdated' Emissions Exemption

    August 19, 2013

    The Obama administration is poised to rescind a little-known emissions exemption for power plants as it seeks to flex its muscle through the Clean Air Act.

    Green groups are pressuring the Environmental Protection Agency to finalize a rule that would force utilities to limit emissions of hazardous pollutants, such as those that contribute to smog, when power plants are shutting down, starting up or malfunctioning.

    Those emissions had previously been exempted from regulations because they were not considered a part of “normal operations,” but the EPA says that policy is now “outdated.”

    The environmental group Sierra Club held rallies last week near two facilities that would be affected by the end of the exemption and urged officials to issue the tightened regulation in September, as scheduled.

    Activists from Detroit and Birmingham, Ala., also met last week with Obama administration officials from the EPA and Council on Environmental Quality in Washington, D.C., to press their case for the rule.

    They stressed that the rule would improve the health of residents near such facilities, who they said often tend to be minorities and earning low incomes.

    “We just want to keep the pressure on EPA and the White House,” said Eitan Bencuya, a Sierra Club spokesman. “It’s an important rule — a critical rule — and we haven’t forgotten about it.”

    Business and industry groups oppose the regulation but appear resigned to it taking effect.

    One industry representative described the end of the exemption as the latest “in a death by 1,000 cuts” for the power industry.

    “If you’re making it more difficult for the utilities to work within the Clean Air Act rules and make it more expensive to deal with these things, that’s not good for energy consumers,” said Michael Whatley, executive vice president for the Consumer Energy Alliance, a coalition of oil companies a groups representing energy-consuming industries.

    The proposed rule faces a Sept. 26 deadline for finalization.

    The EPA is taking it up amid other regulations on power plants proposed by President Obama. His second-term push on climate change includes a tightening of emissions rules to curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

    The EPA defended the startup, shutdown and malfunction measure, saying it would benefit people who live near the impacted power plants facilities by reducing air and water pollution.

    “Air pollution emitted during these periods may adversely impact the health of people nearby and contribute to smog and other problems in communities that are further downwind,” the EPA said in a statement.

    The 36 states affected by the regulation, those that have a State Implementation Plan for meeting pollution standards developed by local and state officials, but approved by the EPA, will have wide berth in how to implement the change.

    It would likely be most onerous for electric utilities that occasionally need to run coal-fired “peaking” plants.

    Utilities run those backup generators when demand for electricity outstrips supply. They’re often older, dirtier and more expensive to operate than those used to provide base load power.

    The very nature of running those units indicates they fall outside the realm of normal operations, utility industry trade group the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) said in its comment on the proposed rule.

    The group said the EPA’s proposal was too strict, contending that pollution control technologies don’t work as effectively during startup and shutdown periods because parameters, such as temperature and pressure, are different.

    “For many reasons, achieving such standards would not only be technically infeasible, but also would be inconsistent with manufacturers’ recommendations and safe operating procedures for control equipment,” Quinlan Shea, EEI vice president for the environment, said in the May 13 comment.

    But states would have plenty of flexibility in implementing the change, according to Adam Riedel, an associate with Los Angeles-based law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips.

    Given that, it’s unclear whether closing the emissions loophole during the shutdown, startup and malfunction period will force utilities to mothball generators, Riedel said.

    In terms of leeway, Riedel said the affected states could determine it’s impossible to install the pollution controls to comply with the regulation. They could then establish higher emissions limits for startup, shutdown and malfunction periods, he said.

    Regardless, Riedel said he expected industry to file legal challenges against the rule.

    “This is certainly a change that utilities are aware of and could have an impact on their operations,” Riedel said. “Plants go into startup and shutdown routinely, then you have peaking plants.”

  2. #122
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Overbearing EPA


    Gold Miners Near Chicken, Alaska Cry Foul Over 'Heavy-Handed' EPA Raids

    September 3, 2013

    When agents with the Alaska Environmental Crimes Task Force surged out of the wilderness around the remote community of Chicken wearing body armor and jackets emblazoned with POLICE in big, bold letters, local placer miners didn’t quite know what to think.

    Did it really take eight armed men and a squad-size display of paramilitary force to check for dirty water? Some of the miners, who run small businesses, say they felt intimidated.

    Others wonder if the actions of the agents put everyone at risk. When your family business involves collecting gold far from nowhere, unusual behavior can be taken as a sign someone might be trying to stage a robbery. How is a remote placer miner to know the people in the jackets saying POLICE really are police?

    Miners suggest it might have been better all around if officials had just shown up at the door -- as they used to do -- and said they wanted to check the water.

    Lots of Federal land in Alaska

    Alaska’s vast Interior, which sprawls to the Canadian border, has been the site of federal-local distrust in the past. It was near this area, 130 miles northwest of Chicken, that National Park Service rangers pointed shotguns at, then tackled and arrested a septuagenarian, for not stopping his boat in midstream of the Yukon River in the fall of 2010. Jim Wilde, 70 years old at the time, had been ordered to prepare to be boarded for a safety inspection.

    Wilde didn’t much like that demand. He swore at park rangers and then headed for shore and a meeting on terra firma. Wilde was arrested and taken to the jail in Fairbanks, more than 100 miles away. He was later tried and found guilty by a federal magistrate for failing to comply with a lawful order from federal agents.

    The state of Alaska, as a whole, can be a place of deeply-rooted mistrust between locals and the agents who try to enforce federal rules.

    Alaska has more federally owned and managed land than any other U.S. state. More than 65 percent of its land is under some sort of federal control. A multitude of federal parks, preserves and wilderness areas are patrolled by agents from more than a dozen U.S. agencies. Many of the people in rural parts of the state, which are either under federal control or border federally-managed areas, have more contact with federal officers than they do with representatives from the state.

    Surprised by armed group of officers

    Miners from the Chicken area -- a gold mining town of just 17 full-time residents and dozens of seasonal miners off the Taylor Highway, between Tok and the Canadian border -- said that during the third week of August they were surprised by groups of four to eight armed officers, who swarmed onto their mining claims with little or no warning.

    The officers were armed and wearing body armor. They were part of the Alaska Environmental Crimes Task Force and were there to check for violations of section 404 of the Clean Water Act, according to several miners who were contacted by the group. Section 404 governs water discharges into rivers, streams, lakes and oceans.

    The task force’s methods are now being questioned by the miners as well as the Alaska congressional delegation.

    “Imagine coming up to your diggings, only to see agents swarming over it like ants, wearing full body armor, with jackets that say POLICE emblazoned on them, and all packing side arms,” said C.R. “Dick” Hammond, a Chicken gold miner who got a visit from the task force.

    “How would you have felt?” Hammond asked. “You would be wondering, ‘My God, what have I done now?’”

    Hammond and other Chicken area miners aren’t alone in wondering what they have done now. Both Alaska U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich have inquired into the task force’s actions. Congressman Don Young is also looking into it. They have been having a difficult time getting straight answers from the EPA.

    Rampant drug and human trafficking?

    The EPA has refused to publicly explain why it used armed officers as part of what it called a “multi-jurisdictional” investigation of possible Clean Water Act violations in the area.

    A conference call was held last week to address the investigation. On the line were members of the Alaska Congressional delegation, their staff, state officers, and the EPA. According to one Senate staffer, the federal agency said it decided to send in the task force armed and wearing body armor because of information it received from the Alaska State Troopers about “rampant drug and human trafficking going on in the area.”

    The miners contacted by the task force were working in the area of the Fortymile National Wild and Scenic River. The federal designation, made in 1980 as part of the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, protects 32 miles between Chicken and Eagle, Alaska. It is a remote area, close to the Canadian border and the town of Boundary. The nearest city of any real size is Fairbanks, 140 miles to the northwest. It was unknown to everyone in the area that there is a rampant problem with drug and human traffickers.

    This also came as news to the Alaska State Troopers, whom the EPA said supplied the information about drugs and human trafficking, and at least one U.S. senator.

    “Their explanation -- that there are concerns within the area of rampant drug trafficking and human trafficking going on -- sounds wholly concocted to me,” said Murkowski, R-Alaska.

    “The Alaska State Troopers did not advise the EPA that there was dangerous drug activity. We do not have evidence to suggest that is occurring,” said Trooper spokesperson Megan Peters.

    The Alaska Department of Law said it knew of the task force’s investigation but that it did not advise the group about any ongoing problems or dangers in the Fortymile River area.

    'Heavy-handed, heavy-armor approach'

    “This seems to have been a heavy-handed, and heavy-armor approach,” said Murkowski. “Why was it so confrontational? The EPA really didn’t have any good answers for this.”

    According to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, one of its compliance officers went along with the task force, but only to look for potential state violations at the mine sites.

    The DEC officer was armed.

    The task force is made up of members of the EPA, the FBI, Coast Guard, Department of Defense, the Alaska Department of Public Safety and the DEC. The chief investigator, Matt Goers, said he could not discuss the details of the recent Fortymile River investigations. So far, no charges, state or federal, have resulted from the group’s work last month.

    Miners in the area are not waiting for the results of the investigation. They have met in Chicken and are demanding a Sept. 14 meeting with the EPA, the state, and the members of the Alaska federal delegation to discuss the task force’s tactics.

    “Compliance exams are a normal thing for miners. Usually (Bureau of Land Management) or DEC points out a problem and you correct it. This (the task force’s action) was way over the top and uncalled for. It was a massive show of intimidation,” said David Likins, a gold miner in the Fortymile Mining District.

    Most of the mines in the area are small, family-run placer operations. They are like the mines seen on on the Reality TV show “Gold Rush: Alaska.” They search for gold by digging up ground and running it through a sluice box, using water to wash away the rocks and leave the valuable gold behind.

    The water they use must be allowed to settle in ponds before it's discharged back into streams or creeks, so that mud and rocks don’t pollute clean, nearby waterways. Water turned turbid (cloudy or muddy) can kill fish.

    Likins said the task force may have found one possible clean water violation at a mine near Boundary, very close to the Canadian border.

    Likins said he believes the aggressive actions of the task force made their investigation much more dangerous for everyone, including the miners and the agents.

    “If it were my mine, and I was sitting on some gold, and people came storming out of the woods, I would probably meet them on the porch, with my shotgun,” he said.

  3. #123
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default EPA Military Sytle Raid on Alaska Town

    Military Style Raid to check the water…what did you think the Federal Gov was going to use that billion bullet stockpile on?

    Posted on by bulletsfirst

    Standard


    Chicken Alaska…no, it’s not some savory culinary dish a la chicken alexander but rather a small gold mining town with a population of 17.


    The members of this town were treated to a rather rude awakening when their little slice of the last frontier was descended upon by a cavalcade of Federal and State agencies. Or more accurately, the Federal Agencies descended while bringing on some token State agencies in order to make it look less like an invasion and subjugation of state sovereignty.


    This raid, in which the agencies involved (10) nearly outnumbered the residents of the town (17) is somehow trying to be spun that it was not a raid.
    Let me stress one point about the previous sentence. The number of AGENCIES nearly eclipsed the population of the town, not the number of agents which was likened by a resident as a swarm of ants.
    “Imagine coming up to your diggings, only to see agents swarming over it like ants, wearing full body armor, with jackets that say “POLICE” emblazoned on them, and all packing side arms,” gold miner C.R. Hammond told the Alaska Dispatch.
    Somehow, invading a town like army ants, armed to the teeth and in body armor doesn’t constitute a “raid”, according to the EPA. A spokesman for the EPA released a statement saying:
    “The ongoing investigation conducted by the AK Environmental Crimes Task Force — consisting of EPA, ADEC, USFWS, ADFG, BLM, Coast Guard, FBI, Alaska State Troopers, NOAA, & US Park Service — did not result in a raid,”
    So what was the EPA et al, in their full body armor and superior firepower up to in the sleepy town of Chicken? Was there some intelligence about eco-terrorists or some other threat to National Security that warranted such a heavy handed military style raid?


    Nope. The EPA wanted to check the water.


    According to them the not raid raid was due to the possibility of violations to the Clean Water Act.
    …….
    ………………..
    ……………………………….
    ……………………………………………….come on!!!


    Oh wait…it gets better. Since the August 19th not raid raid there has been increasing outrage from both private citizens and the politicians of Alaska, including both US Senators and Gov. Parnell who ordered an investigation yesterday stating:
    “this level of intrusion and intimidation of Alaskans is absolutely unacceptable.”
    Hear hear Gov. Parnell. The reaction from the EPA…not only to stonewall the inquiries but also to add new allegations that the not raid raid was in response to rampant drug and human trafficking. I can tell you that that’s bogus from the start.


    You want to know how I know? Because of all the alphabet soup agencies involved, there is one conspicuously absent in an investigation of rampant drug trafficking. Namely, the DEA. Also, is the EPA saying that they didn’t raid a town that they suspected of drug and human trafficking? Really?


    Even the State Troopers weren’t going to back up the EPA’s lies when a spokeswoman for the AK State Troopers stated that they did not advise EPA officials to conduct the raid, adding that no evidence exists to believe those crimes are occurring.
    So what can we take away from all of this.


    First, all agencies of the Federal Government are becoming militarized.
    Second, these formerly non-militarized agencies need bullets and have gotten about 2 billion of them over a ten month period as the federal government continues to stockpile and hoard ammunition.
    Third, the Obama administration and the Federal Government don’t care one lick about state sovereignty.
    Fourth, if this military style raid is going to happen over water, and then get trumped up with false allegations when some people object, just imagine what will happen when these agencies turn their attention to gun owners.
    The possibility that gun owners will be subject to such not raid raids in which the myriad of Fed. Agencies descend up their home on trumped up charges and fishing expeditions is very real. And of course, if some law abiding citizens or their dogs get killed along the way the Feds can no doubt trump up some more charges because the deceased won’t put up much of a defense.
    And THAT is not, “the sky is falling” or conspiracy theory talking. That is a rational extrapolation of the previous four facts. I’m not saying it is going to happen, all i’m saying is that it could happen, because it all ready is, just not to gun owners…yet.

  4. #124
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Military Sytle Raid on Alaska Town

    Come on Rick, you can't rib vector for duping articles and then do it yourself!

    http://www.transasianaxis.com/showth...l=1#post112934

    Hoist on your on petard!

  5. #125
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Military Sytle Raid on Alaska Town

    Lmao!

  6. #126
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Military Sytle Raid on Alaska Town

    Hey, I'm busy posting, not READING. LOL!

    (Of course I was kidding him)

  7. #127
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Submitted by goldenequity on Fri, 11/08/2013 - 07:20in


    Here they go again.
    http://www.offthegridnews.com/2013/10/02/epa-bans-most-wood-...

    The EPA has banned the production and sale of the types of stoves used by about 80 percent of those with such stoves.


    Most of the wood stoves currently nestled inside cabins and homes from coast-to-coast don’t meet the new environmental standard.


    Trading in an old stove for a newer stove isn’t allowed.


    (Some)Local governments have gone further than the EPA and banned not just the sale of such stoves, but the usage of old stoves – and even the usage of fireplaces. That means that even if you still have a stove or a fireplace, you can’t burn it for fear of a fine.

    Montreal moves to eliminate all fireplaces within city limits

  8. #128
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    I thought I posted something about this a while back in the "Overbearing EPA" thread...

  9. #129
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    I have a fireplace. It burns wood. It will continue to burn wood. Fuck the EPA

  10. #130
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Maybe.

    Don't remember seeing it. But I saw this and thought I'd post it here anyway. It's still tyranny

  11. #131
    Super Moderator Malsua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,980
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Fuck the EPA.

    Of course however, the article above is pretty much scare tactics and wrong. There are still plenty of wood burning stoves out there, and even mine meets 4.5 grams per hour of smoke.
    "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt


  12. #132
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Let me ask this Mal, who gives a shit if it meets some stupid, made up, non-scientific regulation? That's the POINT. Not that some are legal and some aren't. Who the fuck are they to tell us we can't burn wood - which is why they are starting a new banning cycle on wood burning stoves in the first place

  13. #133
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    China says, "What?"


  14. #134
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    So you guys gonna become ecoterrorists then? LOL

  15. #135
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    I'll stop burning wood when they ban fire and 55 gallon steel drums.


    I do find it very interesting that this is happening at a time when more and more people are having to augment or completely heat with wood due to costs of electricity, propane/natural gas, and heating oil being so expensive combined with so many being out of work or having significantly reduced incomes.

  16. #136
    Super Moderator Malsua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,980
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    I do believe that some level of smoke control makes a difference in neighborhoods that are dense and subject to frequent temperature inversions.

    There is no reason not to have efficient burners. If you lived somewhere and your neighbor composted sewage right next to your dining room window, you'd have an issue with it. This is really not any different. Smoke invades your home and burners that don't at least have a secondary combustion chamber really dump a shit ton of smoke into the air. Look at those big hydronic boilers. They can foul entire neighborhoods.

    Taking the stand "I can do any goddamn thing I want!!!" is all well and good until your town looks like Pittsburgh in 1925.

    Let's get one thing straight here though...there's reasonable and then there's ridiculous. Cutting smoke to a certain number of grams makes for nice neighbors. Reducing that level to beyond what is feasible is a whole different issue.

    For whatever reason, those Hydronic boilers are exempt from any smokestack regulation. There's a guy not far from me that keeps his greenhouses heated all winter and goes through 125 CORDS of firewood....mostly in 48" pieces. It got so bad the town had to do something. We're not talking about smelling smoke. We're talking about reducing visibility to 1/4 mile and making your eyes sting.

    Last I heard, he install a secondary burner box that treats the smoke and produces more heat and the problem is essentially gone.
    "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt


  17. #137
    Senior Member Toad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Minot, ND
    Posts
    1,403
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    I agree, Mal. I live in a hollow where in calm weather the smoke from my fireplace can just hang. I learned quickly that the biggest problem came from burning fresh green wood. Let it cure for a year under a tarp with decent airflow and my smoke issues were greatly eliminated. Just comes down to the work of cutting any green wood a year in advance.

  18. #138
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Agree to a point. I've done a bit of research into various wood burning apparatus since I'm planning on making wood my primary means of home and water heating when I do buy a home, simply to be more off-the-grid and save money with traditional means of heating getting so expensive.

    As Toad mentioned, a part of the problem is people burning green wood. Another is people being lazy and damping down the fire so they don't have to get up and load the firebox often instead of letting it get up to temperature and burning properly.

    These newer wood burning stoves and outdoor wood boilers are more efficient using less wood and making far less smoke than older models.

    I guess what my sticking point is is that legislation shouldn't be driving these innovations rather the free market should be since less wood use and less smoke are great selling points that would entice people to naturally buy them.

    Also I'm not exactly sure what the solution should be for "bad neighbors" like the greenhouse in Mal's example. I don't think an overreaching federal agency is the right solution since the already obviously large EPA did nothing to help in Mal's situation. It would seem Mal's town handling the issue locally is probably the best compromise to dealing with a situation like that. After all, if that guy lived out in the middle of nowhere, no one would care about the smoke but since he lives in relatively close proximity to others, the community got together and took care of the problem as the community saw fit.

  19. #139
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,466
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    This topic and my post below have been percolating in my head for a bit...

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck View Post
    I do find it very interesting that this is happening at a time when more and more people are having to augment or completely heat with wood due to costs of electricity, propane/natural gas, and heating oil being so expensive combined with so many being out of work or having significantly reduced incomes.
    In thinking about this, is this related to Obama Burn(ing) Down the Suburbs?

    Is this part of an effort to push people out of rural and suburban areas to better corral and control them? Sure seems that way to me. More nudging.

  20. #140
    Super Moderator Malsua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    7,980
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 16 Times in 16 Posts

    Default Re: EPA Bans Most Wood-Burning Stoves

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Ruck View Post
    This topic and my post below have been percolating in my head for a bit...



    In thinking about this, is this related to Obama Burn(ing) Down the Suburbs?

    Is this part of an effort to push people out of rural and suburban areas to better corral and control them? Sure seems that way to me. More nudging.

    While the goals may be the same, I frankly just believe it strikes at independence. If an individual can heat his house without employing people who pay taxes to generate and bring the fuel, then there is no way to control them. Any time a product or service is found, produced, harvested or consumed, the government wants a piece of it. Everything. Hell, they're taxing the air now, it's just a formality to start assessing personal carbon taxes for breathing.

    If the end goal turns Suburbia back into the wilderness that ecolibs masturbate about, so much the better.
    "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •