Avatar feed
Responses: 9
SGT Brian Littrel
4
4
0
How is this related to the military? It is useless and divisive. Some see it as good, others, bad. It's not funny nor informative.
(4)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SSG Environmental Specialist
3
3
0
All I can say I work in the environmental field, in compliance, and some of the rules that have been put into effect over the past 8 years were just down right stupid, costly and in some cases illegal and overstepped the intent of the environmental laws that were passed by congress. So good great, lets simplify.
(3)
Comment
(0)
Capt Retired
Capt (Join to see)
7 y
I retired 13 years ago on this date. I agree with you statement even back then.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Susan Foster
Susan Foster
7 y
Some of them were, but which ones are you referring to? Which ones?
(0)
Reply
(0)
SSG Environmental Specialist
SSG (Join to see)
7 y
Almost every thing the Obama administration implemented with presidential decree, the EPA authority comes from congress, congress has enacted multiple acts over the years, but all of a sudden those laws were superseded by the president, implementing hundreds of regs that were choking industries with little to no real affect to the environment.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Maj John Bell
3
3
0
Sorry, no subscription to WaPo so I haven't read the article. Ever the optimist, my answer: think of all that could go right.
(3)
Comment
(0)
SSG Jessica Bautista
SSG Jessica Bautista
7 y
2330fbf1
Just a comic.
(2)
Reply
(0)
LTC Laborer
LTC (Join to see)
7 y
SSG Jessica Bautista - "Just a comic." ... and a rather silly one at that. But then, this whole thread is.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Maj John Bell
Maj John Bell
7 y
SSG Jessica Bautista - There are times, when politician's cannot do simple math. Back in 1981 I had a Dodge 024. After some advances in engine technology that helped mileage were coupled with some new emission controls, I was still able to get 53 miles to a gallon on the highway. Private enterprise and government regulation working together, made things better.

Then DC put greater emissions restrictions on cars; without any accompanying advances in technology that improved fuel economy. The 1985 models had 12% reduction in emissions and we paid the price in fuel economy the Tourismo (which the 024 became) now got 33 miles to a gallon. I was polluting 12% more emissions per gallon than people who had the Tourismo. But the people who had the Tourismo were burning 61% more fuel. Net result - the Tourismo put out 41% more emissions for the same trip.
Sometimes, particularly when you hit the law of diminishing returns, new regulations are BAD regulations.

I have a friend who is an engine designer for Ford. He tells me that the big three automakers all have engine designs that will get 120+ miles to a gallon, and will pollute less total emissions than current vehicles do on a 100 mile trip, but they cannot pass EPA regulation because the EPA standard is based on emissions per gallon, not emissions per mile.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SSG Jessica Bautista
SSG Jessica Bautista
7 y
I get ya. I honestly haven't done much comparison with pro's and con's. My general belief is that the long-term well-being of the community is more important, but I realize that sometimes a compromise is necessary.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close