Skip to comments.How government cleans up: Joseph Farah smacks EPA before 'biosolids' hit the fan
Posted on 04/04/2002 1:03:48 AM PST by JohnHuang2
So, you say you want the government to take a more active role in fighting pollution?
Let's discuss the way the Environmental Protection Agency has dealt with the messy problem of sludge.
Sludge is sewage. It's the wastewater dregs from homes and businesses. It's the stuff nobody wants in their backyard for understandable reasons.
A investigation by Insight magazine found the EPA, when confronted with a growing problem of what to do with sludge, came up with a creative solution.
The agency renamed sludge. It's now called, effective in 1993, "biosolids." And, guess what? It's good for you.
I'm not kidding.
The EPA now contends that sludge is great fertilizer. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. But renaming a formerly toxic hazard does not make it so. Was EPA lying before? Or is it lying now?
EPA says biosolids should be spread on farmland with reckless abandon. You see, the government had a problem it created itself. Congress passed more laws restricting the way individuals could use their land. Congress made more laws restricting the way businesses could dispose of sludge. Congress passed more laws forbidding the dumping of sludge in the oceans. So, what was the EPA to do with the nasty byproduct of all this legislation?
It renamed it. The EPA began promoting sludge as beneficial to the environment and away went the problem.
Once again, I point this out to you as an example of how government does not and cannot solve real-life problems. Only individuals can. As more Americans turn their eyes to Washington for solutions to everyday problems, it is critically important to understand the way policy is made by the central government.
The truth is that government doesn't know any more than you or I know about the potential harmful effects of sludge.
But, when government says it is good, individuals like you and I lose our rights to object. We forfeit our rights to sue those who spread it on properties near us. We end any accountability we would have if someone in the private sector tried to do something to which we objected.
As I mentioned in a column just last week, the worst environmental disasters the world has ever known have been created by government. Yet, activists continue to push government to become more involved in finding solutions to problems that are most often created by government.
As Alan Keyes would ask, "Does this make sense?"
In the United States, the federal government prosecutes small private landowners for making sensible improvements on their own land. They are jailed, fined, ruined all because some bureaucrat knows better.
Government is the real threat to the environment. It always has been. It always will be. How foolish for misguided environmentalists to turn to the mega-polluters for solutions.
If government truly wants to conserve the natural state of the environment, the best idea is to get out of the way. In the medical profession, the rule is "first do no harm." That ought to be the new credo for every lawmaker and every bureaucrat. But, instead, government operates under a "hypocritic oath." It destroys the environment in the name of preserving it. It uses its power to tie the hands of private property owners who want only the best for their land, while using command-and-control tactics and master plans that wreak havoc on the natural state.
This is an example of why the founders of America deliberately tied the hands of the central government in the Constitution.
But, I guess, until the biosolids really hit the fan, we're not going to realize just how smart those guys were. We're going to continue to centralize power in the hands of a few elitists in Washington people who think they are smarter than us and can do no wrong.
It has to be properly treated, e.g. all pathogens such as coliform bacteria, worms, etc. killed. Also a problem with sludge from industrial areas such as the old so-called "rust belt" areas contains heavy metals which makes their unsuitable as fertilizer.
A curious note: A number of years ago there was a test process in the District of Columbia that combined paper trash with sludge in a process that killed all pathogens and rendered a very fine and safe fertilizer. The District was chosen as the test site because it has a major sludge problem, and also because the sludge has no heavy metals in it.
Washington, D.C. famous for its good S**T! Go figure.
The legislature has mandated a new permitting process on spreading this sh!t beginning next year. The new permitting process will be lengthy and must include: source, quantity, quality, and hydrologic data on surface and ground water. The new non-point pollution regs mandate this increased consideration on run-off pollution. There are possibilities that public notices, hearings, monitoring, and reporting will be required in some cases. Permit cost will run $1-5 thousand.
You just made my day. Thanks.
Oh, no doubt they have the technology to clean the sludge but it isn't done beacuse it is very expensive. So, they just dump the partially treated sludge with all the viruses and bacterias and ecoli and heavy metals and pesticides and poisons on the land we grow the food we eat. MMMMM good for you.
Good for the people living downwind as well...lets them really build up a resistance to all the virus and bacteriological crap to which they're exposed....if it doesn't kill 'em first.
Boy, doesn't that just say it all.
Gosh, no! - It plumb slipped my mind. :o)
Sludge coming soon to a farm, pond, golf course, garden or your back yard. Sludge is good for you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.