Our Senator Hirono is Opposing Pruitt for EPA.

[Guest]

Why is this an important Hawaiian issue as our senator so suggests?

Really I am trying to grasp the reasons to why our Senator would be so admittedly against this choice of leadership for the EPA?
In this recent video, She looks like she was trying to rally a witch hunt and Mr Pruitt is the witch. jmo

http://www.bigislandvideonews.com/2017/0...nistrator/

Was Oklahoma some kind of leading state in america for clean air and water protections, prior to Mr Pruitt's impacts or dismantling of its EPA agency?

Why has Mr Pruitt been suing the EPA some multiple times over the past few years? Does he think the EPA can do more or less?

How can Mr Pruitt and his EPA leadership change things or directions for our Puna district? or within the Hawaiian islands for that matter?

Could this type of change in leadership lead to positive changes or "some type" of oversight for our local Geothermal Power plant here in lower Puna?

Any thoughts, views or opinions on any of this would be helpful at this point, Mahalo in advance.

[Justin]

Generally speaking, I don't think it's wise to put someone who has professed their disdain for a government agency in charge of that government agency. Kind of like putting the fox in charge of the hen house. That goes for Pahoa, Hawaii Island, the State, and the Fed.

If anything, having Pruitt in charge of the EPA would mean less oversight for Geothermal. It will be all about rewarding big business, and as little regulation as possible.

[leilanidude]

The EPA has been out of control for a while. Look at that Colorado gold mine stream they fouled up last year as one of just many examples. They have had no real oversight for many years and have run rampant on rules and regulations, many times without considering the effect of those rules and regulations on the people they affect. That, in essence, is the new goal they are being given. Stop and consider before you implement new rules.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

The EPA has been out of control

Yes!
So out of control you can now see the sun set along the southern California coast when it reaches the horizon, not just fade away into the smog at 4 PM in the afternoon. In areas where toxic sludge formerly keep people out of the water, and safe from drowning, swimmers can again enter lakes for a dip on a hot day. But maybe we should blame the EPA should there ever be a swimming related fatality. And then there's the fish, did you know you can once more eat fish from rivers and streams without filling your body with the maximum daily dose of mercury at the same time?

But instead, why not focus on one mistake the EPA might have made in the last 46 years, and use it as an excuse to throw the baby out with the bathwater, that is, as soon as we take the time to consider the rule about throwing out babies as restrictive to industry and repeal the regulation....... Now, that's better. Bye, bye baby.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[leilanidude]

why not focus on one mistake the EPA might have made in the last 46 years..
-----
One mistake? Now that is "fake news".

edit to add:
Google - "EPA mistakes"

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

One mistake? Now that is "fake news".

I didn't say they made one mistake. I said focus on one mistake, which has the effect of ignoring all the good they have done in 46 years.

That's the real news.

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.

[leilanidude]

I didn't focus on it. Read again.

BTW, your running of a successful business for many years is considered a "problem" to people like glinda. If you have been successful, you either were underpaying your employees (who obviously did all the work to make you successful) or were not paying your "fair share" of taxes, or both, as a result of that success which has enabled you to live in that ocean front house in HPP.

Someday, you may realize that the ruling party here, is not on your side.

[Rob Tucker]

Keep it local folks or watch it go away.

Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator

[Obie]

Here is an example of EPA overreach in Hawaii.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposes to cap emissions at three Hawaii Island electrical plants to improve visibility at Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, even as Kilauea continues to be the largest contributor to haze on the island.

Hawaii Electric Light Co.’s 575 pounds per day of emissions is a scant 0.04 percent of the 661 tons of sulfur dioxide per day Kilauea Volcano was emitting last week. But the EPA’s Hawaii Regional Haze Implementation Plan is supposed to be a long-term plan to clear the air by 2064, when Kilauea may no longer be erupting, said Kerry Drake, associate director of the Air Division at EPA’s Region 9 office in San Francisco. Measurable progress must be shown by 2018, under the plan.

I am all for clean air but this borders on ridiculous and should be stopped.

More here :
http://hawaiitribune-herald.com/sections...lants.html

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

Keep it local folks
...
How can Mr Pruitt and his EPA leadership change things or directions for our Puna district?
Could this type of change in leadership lead to positive changes or "some type" of oversight for our local Geothermal Power plant

gypsy,
In my previous comments about change in leadership at the EPA I should have included how it might apply specifically to PGV as you asked. Not a lot is known so soon after Pruitt's confirmation, but based on his past actions:

1) Initially, in the short term I would expect little to change at PGV. The EPA have bigger fish to fry elsewhere. When you look at PGV's record overall, it has caused minimal problems compared to the big polluters, it is already in operation, so most likely they will leave well enough alone.

2) In the longer term, if anything changes there will be less regulation, and eased federal restrictions for additional wells.

leilanidude -
I once asked the local real estate tax office, what, exactly, my taxes paid for. The clerk rattled off a list: county parks, ambulance service, fire department, etc, and when she finished I replied there was not one service or facility she mentioned that I used. She looked flabbergasted. So in the case of my real estate tax, "fair share" would have been $0. The same applies to all the other taxes I pay. You'll also be pleased to know that every one of my neighbors have/had real jobs, were considered successful in their endeavors, saved their money, and bought homes here after paying a "fair share" of taxes. They're all middle class folk, with not a multi-bankrupt plutocrat tax cheat among them. Believe me, I know my neighbors well, and taxes are a regular topic of conversation when we get together. For future reference, make a note that when I discuss taxes with my neighbors, it's generally over how high they are, not how to get out of paying them. Which your accusation seems to imply. An accusation based on what? (that's a rhetorical question by the way)

You could never convince a monkey to give you a banana by promising him limitless bananas after death in monkey heaven.