Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 ...coming after the backyard BBQ and griller enthusiast I can only think that this is in our future.... GG ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 GG: Add a "Wide Load" vehicle in front and behind, and I think you've got it! LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Waidaminnit.... What's this about the EPA and barbecuing...?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Waidaminnit.... What's this about the EPA and barbecuing...?? $15,000 grant to one of your CA colleges to study the design of splatter shields, filters and other devices to be required on propane grills to cut global warming...........and for "world-wide application". Seems somebody in Washington wants to teach the world the environmentally correct way to grill.......... LL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Read some years ago that Yellowstone had banned Bar B Ques because of the "toxic" smoke that was generated by so many campers. Wait till they put a tax on the co2 that you exhale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 Read some years ago that Yellowstone had banned Bar B Ques because of the "toxic" smoke that was generated by so many campers. Wait till they put a tax on the co2 that you exhale. Don't forget about all of the Moose, Elk and Buffalo they have roaming in the park that burp and exhale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lost Trail Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 ...coming after the backyard BBQ and griller enthusiast I can only think that this is in our future.... GG ~ I remember seeing this back in the '70's. If it was updated to today's EPA standards, it would probably be about 30 pages worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted March 16, 2015 Share Posted March 16, 2015 $15,000 grant to one of your CA colleges to study the design of splatter shields, filters and other devices to be required on propane grills to cut global warming...........and for "world-wide application". Seems somebody in Washington wants to teach the world the environmentally correct way to grill.......... LL Oh, Swell. Wonder if they'll be trying [again] to ban charcoal grills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Your lawnmower could be next! This is an out of control guvmint agency that should be controlled, reigned in or abolished! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rye Miles #13621 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 A real friend to the EPA…………... http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/16/al-gore-sxsw-punish-climate-deniers/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rancocas Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 The EPA initial accomplished a lot in cleaning up the environment. I know of a several major accomplishments the clean water act enabled the return of Shad to the Delaware River. The clean act eliminated millions of pounds of hydrocarbon per year from being released to the atmosphere. At one plant the propane leaks in some areas produced concentrations in the explosive range. The project expense to eliminate these leaks actually produced a net positive cash flow. The EPA is an important Agency for the protection of our health and the health of future generations. It's when politics gets involved, problems and mismanagement begin. Let's not be to hasty to throw out the baby with the bath water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 The EPA initial accomplished a lot in cleaning up the environment. I know of a several major accomplishments the clean water act enabled the return of Shad to the Delaware River. The clean act eliminated millions of pounds of hydrocarbon per year from being released to the atmosphere. At one plant the propane leaks in some areas produced concentrations in the explosive range. The project expense to eliminate these leaks actually produced a net positive cash flow. The EPA is an important Agency for the protection of our health and the health of future generations. It's when politics gets involved, problems and mismanagement begin. Let's not be to hasty to throw out the baby with the bath water. Like most government programs they have the right intentions at conception but end up a bureaucracy of power grabbing control. GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Bullweed Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 Wouldn't it be interesting to see a move by the Supreme Court to require the Legislative bodies to create or modifying the US Constitution, and the Executive branch to aprove, so that our constitution matched what our govt actually is and does. It would make for some interesting discussins about the justification of many departments and rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 If the $15k story is true-- it's peanuts, study-wise. The EPA was set up in the Nixon administration, at the same time as the Clean Air and Water Act. I grew up here in the 1950s and 1960s. Never saw an eagle or a heron; we have them all over now. Couldn't see the mountains from here in the summers for the particulate in the air (mostly slash burners); that's long gone. You can't dump what you want in the rivers or in Puget Sound, and haven't been able to do so for a long time. I hope my grandchildren (I have 12 of them) and their kids can keep enjoying our natural world, and that we get some control over our utterly wasteful ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted March 17, 2015 Share Posted March 17, 2015 The intent of the EPA and Clean Water and Air Act was much needed but now has gone way too far. The pendulum has swung too far to the other extreme as is often the case. Perhaps it will swing back to neutral in another 50 years. We can see that with all the Gun Control Acts being implemented too. As far as slash burning, a somewhat distant past controlled (human caused) release of smoke and such from burning of wood/vegetation)in the PNW and west coast? The particulate matter from slash burning has been replaced with massive forest/wild fires cause be poorly managed forest (Forest Service & BLM). The poor management is the act of allowing over mature timber to accumulate from dead/dying/ insect infested timber and the highly flamable fuel supply is allowed to grow. Then a man made or natural ignition of the fuel and you got a forest fire of epic proportions and natural occurring smoke or pollution that could very well exceed the old slash burning of the past. So, the wood/vegetation burning on a huge mass scale is still there, but just under different circumstances and could even be worse today than yesterdays. Oh yes, let us not count out pollution from Volcanos, which Washington State had one. A Volcano puts out more bad stuff than all the fossil fuel power plants. In 60 years, the population of the USA has increased by what? and their contribution to consuming and pollution is what? Back to the EPA, they want to regulate the farts (carbon mono/di oxide) from cows and the run off water quality of feed lots + water run off from highly fertilized farm fields. Why Not? The methods to control the release of farts and water run off are there, it just takes money and of course that can be generated by passing the cost to the consumer, just like it has/is being done in the energy sector. This topic is endless and both sides have valid points. Enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted March 17, 2015 Author Share Posted March 17, 2015 More EPA $15,000 'peanuts' http://freebeacon.com/issues/epa-wants-to-monitor-how-long-hotel-guests-spend-in-the-shower/ GG ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Every summer we have several forest fires going here in Montana. Most of it is from a lighting strike hitting all the beetle killed trees that the tree huggers insist are beneficial to the wild life. Thousands of acres go up in flames each year. The State used to let loggers harvest the beetle killed trees until the huggers threw a tantrum and filed a suit. Along with the beneficial to wild life spew they tossed in erosion. If they want to control erosion have the loggers leave a 3ft high stump to catch the snow from just sliding downhill. Less killed trees to catch fire and release tons of smoke, plus the logging industry wins too. Dead trees don't help the wild life after they burn. The same goes for this Ethanol crud they're putting in the gas. Destroys fuel systems in vehicles built before ...I think ...2010, along with small engines such as mowers, snow blowers ( for us northerner's) and some older generators to name a few. Plus most vehicles get less mileage using the ethanol gas than the non ethanol. So, if you get less mileage, you're burning more fuel and putting more emissions into the air than you did with non ethanol. The only ones benefitting that junk are the corn growers and the Gov't getting the taxes from it. A panel of European scientists wrote a study a couple of years ago about the emissions problem. They said no matter what we do to cut it and lessen the greenhouse gases; all it takes is one Volcano to erupt and it's wiped out 5 years of all the emission controls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusty Balz, SASS#46599 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The idiots are looking at the impact of your BBQ grill as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The idiots are looking at the impact of your BBQ grill as well They'd throw a fit if they saw the smoke coming off of ours when mama forgets to turn the meat. My neighbor uses wood chips in his. Hickory, mesquite, maple...depends on what he's cooking. We had the FD show up at his place last year because a neighbor 2 houses away from his thought his was on fire. All he was doing was smoking a turkey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 EPA was voted in by concerned people, and can be voted out by the People if the People so decide. Problem is, The People are clueless nor care that they have created a Monster that is somewhat out of control. When laws are passed and governed to address the Big Issues, then those same laws are eventually enforced down to the micro level. One broad brush law fits all. Not!! One BBQ grill/car tailpipe is nothing but add up a few million of them, then it is equivalent to an industrial plant. Can not have that. One lawn yard discharging fertilizer water from over watering is nothing, but add all the yards up and you have impacted a river. Ethonol in your gas is a product from Corn/sunflowers, a food source. Corn takes nitrogen out of the soil and if you continually harvest corn from same land, then the land becomes tired (lack of some important nutrients for growing plants). To fix that, farmers use fertilizers rich in nitrogen to supplement the crop. Kinda like using hormones in livestock. Hmmm, then you have runoff to the water ways and pollution. I could go on, like lead usage in firearms and hunting, but bottom line is,,,, be careful for what you wish for because you may get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tascosa, SASS# 24838 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 First place no one elected the EPA! They need Congress to vote on what they try to pass. I also hear the EPA is concerned over the shower water wasted in hotels and motels!!!! I remember the EPA closing the road to Jacks Creek camping ground in NM cause it was made with lead tailings from a lead mine!!!! Without some oversight they just keep going on and on about non important stuff...its called trying to justify their existence!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Gatlin, SASS 10274L Posted March 18, 2015 Author Share Posted March 18, 2015 First place no one elected the EPA! They need Congress to vote on what they try to pass. I also hear the EPA is concerned over the shower water wasted in hotels and motels!!!! I remember the EPA closing the road to Jacks Creek camping ground in NM cause it was made with lead tailings from a lead mine!!!! Without some oversight they just keep going on and on about non important stuff...its called trying to justify their existence!!!!! see post# 16 GG ~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 First place no one elected the EPA! They need Congress to vote on what they try to pass. I also hear the EPA is concerned over the shower water wasted in hotels and motels!!!! I remember the EPA closing the road to Jacks Creek camping ground in NM cause it was made with lead tailings from a lead mine!!!! Without some oversight they just keep going on and on about non important stuff...its called trying to justify their existence!!!!! EPA didn't just fall out of the sky. People voted in whomever appointed, elected or whatever that created and supports the EPA. If the majority of the minority of voters decide they don't want a particular policy in government, there is a process to make the change. But that is a side topic to this topic. EPA is in charge of clean water, of which there is becoming a shortage nationwide. Control the consumption, then you control the waste/treatment stream and water treatment process. People will still be able to take a long hot shower in the future, but it may be rather spendy for the general population. There have been and will continue to be 'Super Fund' Clean up projects to fix past contamination sites. Funded by... tax dollars. Your Jack Creek camp ground road is just a wonderful example that every county in every state has something similar.. BTW, how is the water runoff from this lead contamination road being controlled so it doesn't go off site and into the bigger eco system? Speaking of lead contamination, what is your lead remediation plan working where you shoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Your lawnmower could be next! This is an out of control guvmint agency that should be controlled, reigned in or abolished! I would vote for ABOLISH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Lead remediation at our range is a non issue. We're landlocked on 21 acres of mostly gumbo. For those that aren't familiar with gumbo, it's not quite dirt and not quite grease. When wet your boot size grows about 1 size per step. What I don't understand is unless there's a stream, lake or river next to a range where runoff of soil could present a problem, how is lead going to be a problem? Where does lead come from? The ground ...right? So going back into the ground is no more than returning it to where it came from to start with, just in a different form. And I can't ever recall wild life grazing on dirt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tascosa, SASS# 24838 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Like any government agency with no oversight they will keep on trying to justify their existence. Sort of like the FCC now taking over the internet. Guess what that's going to cost us? Congress should vote on what those two agencies do!! Power corrupts and absolute power absolutely corrupts!! I think I heard that some where. What idiot thought they should try to regulate our backyard grills??????????????????? Whats next? Our fireplaces in our homes???? NOTHING is out of their reach. And yre right Charlie W, I never saw wildlife grazing on dirt either.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badger Mountain Charlie SASS #43172 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Apparently they think loons do. In Washington Statek they are trying to ban lead fishing sinkers in lakes where loons nest. I think this is just another loonie idea on their part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Now that we live in a society that wastes nothing (much less is choking in waste) and neither overexploits nor pollutes public resources, we should abolish the EPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Like any government agency with no oversight they will keep on trying to justify their existence. Sort of like the FCC now taking over the internet. Guess what that's going to cost us? Congress should vote on what those two agencies do!! Power corrupts and absolute power absolutely corrupts!! I think I heard that some where. What idiot thought they should try to regulate our backyard grills??????????????????? Whats next? Our fireplaces in our homes???? NOTHING is out of their reach. And yre right Charlie W, I never saw wildlife grazing on dirt either.... Already done. Currently manufactured woodstoves have to meet strict EPA standards. And in our area we're only allowed to use 'em at regulated times - many, many "No Burn Day" announcements every winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tascosa, SASS# 24838 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Really Hardpan?? I was saying that 'tongue in cheek', and didn't realize the worthless EPA had their irons in that fire (pun intended). They haven't tried that in Texas yet. I can't wait till the EPA tries to regulate branding fires!!! They wont know what hit them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Lead remediation at our range is a non issue. We're landlocked on 21 acres of mostly gumbo. For those that aren't familiar with gumbo, it's not quite dirt and not quite grease. When wet your boot size grows about 1 size per step. What I don't understand is unless there's a stream, lake or river next to a range where runoff of soil could present a problem, how is lead going to be a problem? Not picking on ya or anything, but EPA and Enviromentalists see it another way, and they have some merit. Some lead splatter, microscopic and on up particulates, chunks can/will be transported off site by wind/water/human activities ,,,given enough time. Never know when fill/borrow/excavation dirt will be needed long after the range is closed, and thus off site distribution. Just like that camp ground road being built out of lead mine tailings. Which reminds me of buidings/roads being constructed using Uranium processed tailings. both seemed like a good idea at the time, but the affects were discovered decades later. Solution (simplified for this discussion) according to EPA is to totally clean up the site and capsulate the contamination using best technology and then monitor it for the rest of human time. That is what industry has to do now. Where does lead come from? The ground ...right? So going back into the ground is no more than returning it to where it came from to start with, just in a different form. And I can't ever recall wild life grazing on dirt. Depends on the concentration of the stuff. you are putting back into the ground. Be it lead, petroleum, uranium, sludge, garbage, or whatever else you want to talk about. I do not have a clue what natural background concentration of lead is, but I suspect is super low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forty Rod SASS 3935 Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Your lawnmower could be next! This is an out of control guvmint agency that should be controlled, reigned in or abolished! Made a minor correction for you, Rye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Whiskers Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Well Mr. Blastmaster; I'd suspect the lead concentration at our range is not very high. Between snow melt or rain run off from our hillsides or berm built backstops that wash into the shooting area; we have quite a few folks in our club that surface mine (read pick up) lead for melting down and casting bullets. The rest are burrowed into the back stops. Wouldn't one tend to think that lead mines must have a fairly high concentration in order to make it profitable enough to mine in the 1st place. What shooting ranges leave in lead is a very small drop in a very BIG bucket in comparison to one mine. As for using our range dirt for fill...I don't know of any use for gumbo as fill. If and or when our range closes, there was an agreement with the Broken O ranch who we bought the land from; that when it does close it goes to the Boy Scouts. They shoot out there several times a year as does the 4H'ers. The land is in an area that had very little grass, so it wasn't worth much as grazing land. That's how we were able to afford buying it. What grass there is, is all prairie grass and you can almost walk between the blades. And where there is grass it's away from the shooting area. I agree with you about using lead or uranium tailings for roads. That was just plain stupid, but so was a lot of stuff being done before we even knew of the dangers. The EPA does some good things to make our existence possible, but they also get carried away with a lot of this kind of BS that was the crux of the OP....BBQ's. PS: check our web site. The Sun River Rangers in Montana. We have a picture tour of our range. You'll see what I mean about being landlocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blastmaster Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Hazard Standards for Lead in Paint, Dust and Soil (TSCA Section 403) OverviewTitle: Lead; Identification of Dangerous Levels of Lead; Final Rule (January 5, 2001) (PDF) (36 pp, 356K, About PDF) Tracking numbers:Docket number: OPPTS-62156H; FRL-6763-5 RIN: 2070-AC63 Current phase: Final Rule Published Does this regulation apply to me?This rule establishes standards to help property owners, lead paint professionals and government agencies identify lead hazards in residential paint, dust and soil. The rule establishes standards for lead-based paint hazards (including hazards from lead in dust and soil) in most pre-1978 housing and child-occupied facilities. Under these standards, lead is considered a hazard when equal to or exceeding 40 micrograms of lead in dust per square foot on floors, 250 micrograms of lead in dust per square foot on interior window sills, and 400 parts per million (ppm) of lead in bare soil in children's play areas or 1200 ppm average for bare soil in the rest of the yard. In addition, paint in deteriorating condition, on a friction or impact surface, or on certain chewable surfaces is also defined as a hazard. I bolded and changed the font color. Don't shoot the messenger.,,me! I understand your position. You may argue that the above doesn't apply. It was my first google search hit but it has bearing on the topic. To prove or disprove the concentration limits, one would have to test via lab sampling and test procedures. I am sure there are other regulations more specific to private property vs property opened to the public. Then it comes to the surface and a head when and if the land/house/etc. is sold. A small plot of land (shooting range or shopping mall) is insignificant to a much larger mine, but there are thousands of shooting ranges and shopping malls and when you add them all up, it becomes significant real quick. As far as I know, lead-lead mines are deep underground operations. Wait, lead can be a bi-product from other mineral extraction (surface mine) operations/mines. I am not familiar with EPA letting small sized operations by pass the rules. They have taken on industrial/municipal points of operation and are now going for the smaller/private holdings. Edit: gumbo-whatever may be mixed with other soils to form fill. Or used as a pond liner sealer or cap material for a land fill. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.