If there's one thing we know for sure, the o&g industry has gotten uber rich spending billions of dollars exploring miles beneath the ground for a commodity just so they can hurry up and dump it down the drain and pay fines. They don't call it black gold for a reason, that's for sure.
I still don't know if you are deliberately obtuse or if you really do struggle to grasp simple concepts.
You're the dumbass who basically stated the industry prefers to pay fines than implement reasonable controls. That's lol absurd and inaccurate. Negligence is how these guys get laid with exemplary damages and there's hundreds of well funded environmental groups laying in waiting to pounce. What you've described is an extreme exception and anything but ordinary course.
You probably shouldn't accuse me, or anybody, for throwing out extreme exceptions given that is the very basis of almost every argument I've seen you try to make. Unless you like kicking your own feet out from under you. Secondly, your construction of straw-men is tiring. I mean, I get it, why waste brain power to actually try and articulate a cognitive response when you can just act boorish and wildly misinterpret anything disagreeing with your beliefs.
And, while my example may be an extreme one of the total shitstorm that can happen when companies are reckless and negligent, it doesnt negate the fact that it is way more common than you play it out to be. For the record, my client is an oil company, not the EPA. I don't think they are going out there just thinking of ways to spill their oil, but we've already gone over your penchant for that argumentative style. I also do actually believe that at least their environmental team does care about keeping spills to a minimum because of the environmental impact. That said, minimum is the key word here. Spills happen, and they will continue happening regardless of how many checks are put in place. There were checks in place here, and some dudley-do-wrong behind a switchboard decided the computer telling him there was a problem ignored it and kept opening the shutoff valves. Pretending an oil company can just put checks in place and everything is hunky dory is assinine. If you don't realize they put in spill contingency plans, budget billions for cleanup and fines, weigh risk/rewards for where they pipe product, etc.. then I'm at a loss. It's simple economics, that black gold is worth nothing if they can't send it to market. They'll stuff money into any politicians g-string if they can ensure that happens, and they'll accept some risks such as losing millions in product and paying hefty fines if it means trillions in profit. They don't want the spill to happen of course, but they'll also cut corners to ensure the green keeps flowing.
.
This right here.
This isn't some Sierra Club tree-hugging leftist shill. This guy works in the industry, is on the front lines, and sees things first hand... And yet he can see the bigger picture. It would serve us all well to listen to him.
We aren't going to shut off the valves or pipelines over night, cars and the grid aren't going to be converted to be 100% "clean" in an instant, but there does need to be a regulatory agency tasked with enforcing policy and penalizing polluters.
As well we should be quickly using all our focus and urgency to expand alternative energy sources, generation, and storage. Going to extreme lengths, at all costs, with wanton disregard for the long term consequences to extract dirty finite fuels is a recipe for disaster and insensitive to the future of the planet for life as we know it.
Clean water and air should not be a political issue.
Let's be clear, I am definitely egalitarian-communitarian, or "liberal" as it were. Climate change is happening regardless of what we do but we do have a hand in speeding up the process. This is scientific theory and until someone can actually prove the hypothesis wrong, that is what it is. Larger impacts than the dreaded "sea-level rise" are ocean acidification, desertification, and shifting growing zones. Let's be honest, without the Aquifer half of Kansas would be a freaking wasteland(some may argue it already is) and it is only going to get worse. But, I'm just as large a proponent of emerging from the fossil fuel age because, well why not? The future is available right now and newer cleaner technologies which can lessen our dependence on a finite commodity can only be a good thing. Not to mention provide many more permanent jobs than any pipeline will ever create. The largest hurdle is, and probably always will be, a better battery. Invest there. I find it odd that a country which has long prided itself on being innovative, taking charge, a world leader, etc.. is now just content with sitting back on its haunches while the rest of the world is actively thinking about and building the future.
As for the EPA, I think anyone that has worked alongside them long enough will tell you it becomes a love-hate relationship. It is an integral agency that is built on a solid foundation. The problems often come with overreach and ever-shifting criteria. I can't count the amount of times where we thought a section was done, met all guidelines, criteria were good, and then all of the sudden a new directive is in place, new criteria, new tests, etc..
