Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 189 posts

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#141

Post by azinman2 »

macintux wrote: post #126
azinman2 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That happens because the incentives and supply chain machinery allow it to. Externalities are never priced in regardless of where things are made. Price in externalities, regardless of origin, and things would change. That's just one example of a potential solution, and one that many are trying to do with carbon taxes/credits.

That seems to be the fatal trap we're in: government can compensate for the fact that capitalism is effectively unable to price in externalities, but the big winners from capitalism have the resources to simultaneously lobby government for less regulation and persuade voters that government is evil.

I don’t see any other method of economy / government solving either. USSR hid all kinds of dangers (including Chernobyl), China barely is reacting to climate change and notoriously has sacrificed its people for economic gain, etc.

The value structures of how much to care for any one person are different independent of government. Individual versus collective shows itself in both democratic capitalist governments on both sides, and now with market reforms so does communism.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#142

Post by hhaha88 »

kaiju0 wrote: post #37

This is a pretty typical growth pattern. Industrial zone establishes and city is set far away in a safe area. City expands and resident need cheap housing. The cheap housing is built near the industrial zone as that is how economic forces work. People then see this and say they built industrial next to the poor people when the opposite occurred. Now the industry is giving cancer to poor people and needs to be punishe…

Why debate right and wrong and not simply make it an engineering problem to let people work on?

Why not make that our political discourse? We stop the world at work to solve problems in revenue generation.

Somehow this has to be mired in political speak.

Letting figurative power thrive while squashing people is good business.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#143

Post by vineyardmike »

sseagull wrote: post #103
vineyardmike wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference between a person driving a car, and a factory spewing off a criminally high level of carcinogenic chemicals. > A lot of the things we rely on every day have toxic byproducts And we should stop and fix that. Why do we accept this as ok? > by your logic you should give up your car because someone moved in to the lot next to you and built a house. My logic says we should phase out cars that we know…

> A lot of the things we rely on every day have toxic byproducts And we should stop and fix that. Why do we accept this as ok? Of course. But it is not always easy. You can’t always wave your hand and make non-harmful alternatives. Sometimes it is due to incentives, but also sometimes it is really just chemistry or physics. See the “tin whisker” phenomenon when they took lead out of solder.

> Sometimes it is due to incentives,

We can fix those. If you could sue a chemical plant (or it's engineers!) that design/implement carcinogenic pollution, i bet the incentives get better fast.

> but also sometimes it is really just chemistry or physics. >You can’t always wave your hand and make non-harmful alternatives

I think we can more often then we give it credit for. Especially if there was more money flowing into R&D, and more regulatory efforts.

> See the “tin whisker” phenomenon when they took lead out of solder.

I've never heard of this and I buy tons of electronics. Seems like industry incentives took care of this. Now we have no lead... and i can still buy iPhones whenever i want.

Why do we accept destruction in our society? Why don't we push for better? Nothing has to be the way it is if we don't want it to be.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#144

Post by [deleted] »

dantheman wrote: post #41
kaiju0 wrote: post #37

This is a pretty typical growth pattern. Industrial zone establishes and city is set far away in a safe area. City expands and resident need cheap housing. The cheap housing is built near the industrial zone as that is how economic forces work. People then see this and say they built industrial next to the poor people when the opposite occurred. Now the industry is giving cancer to poor people and needs to be punishe…

It's the same when people move next to the airport and then complain about noise. In general this can be solved with an extension of property rights, the industrial zone/airport/music venue etc can own the rights to "pollute" the neighboring areas, much like buying air rights in a city. Then it's clear when you purchase / rent / what level of noise / pollution you can expect. This allows market forces to work, if aft…

[deleted]

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#145

Post by imoverclocked »

tux3 wrote: post #99
sokoloff wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you have a campfire (or fire in your fireplace), you are releasing polluting carcinogens. When you heat olive oil to the smoke point, you are releasing carcinogens. If/when you do those things, are you also doing something wrong?

Yes, except scale makes all the difference. If you burn a tire, you're polluting and releasing toxic fumes around. But one burnt tire doesn't affect the neighborhood. Industry is not negligible. At larger scale toxic waste hurts a lot more people, of course it does! The campfire whataboutism is a bit silly in comparison.

Each one of us burning one tire is a large scale toxic waste issue. Same thing with wood fires.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#146

Post by stonemetal12 »

kaiju0 wrote: post #37

This is a pretty typical growth pattern. Industrial zone establishes and city is set far away in a safe area. City expands and resident need cheap housing. The cheap housing is built near the industrial zone as that is how economic forces work. People then see this and say they built industrial next to the poor people when the opposite occurred. Now the industry is giving cancer to poor people and needs to be punishe…

I would still blame the industrial zone in this case. If it is unsafe to live within 5 miles of the plant they should own all land within 5 miles of the plant.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#147

Post by likeclockwork »

parineum wrote: post #100
dd36 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Property rights. If the adjacent property is unsafe due to your actions, you should pay to fix the problem.

If someone buys the adjacent property after you've made it unsafe without breaking any laws, who pays?

For someone to buy it someone has to sell it, no?

The adjacent property is already owned and already being spoiled.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#148

Post by drawqrtz »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #118
francisofascii wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right to pollute should never be granted in perpetuity. If anything, it should be a recurring cost that increases or decreases based on the how much polluting is occurring. That way the markets work in incentivizing less polluting.

Yup. For the most part I would like to see current pollution regulations tossed wholesale. Instead, put a price tag on each pollutant. The charge is applied at the point in the supply chain where the pollutant is created or extracted and is rebated to anyone who destroys the pollutant (although they may be charged for other pollutants created in the process.) Think of the oft-proposed carbon tax, just much, much broa…

In an ideal world this would be a great solution, but on earth I think this would invite a whole host of corruption, similar to the carbon offset trading. Not combating the problem but making everyone richer.

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#149

Post by kmeisthax »

azinman2 wrote: post #113
dontcare007 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, a failure on the part of the beaurocrats to deny the zoning changes.

Houston is imfamous for not having zoning. That's how you get an industrial plant next to a school next to a mall next to housing next to a cattle feed lot.

Given how zoning utterly ratfucked half the west coast into being all single-family hellscapes; I'm not inclined to say Houston should start having American-style zoning codes. Zoning goes way beyond safety regulation and includes all sorts of things that should never have been brought under democratic control. If we want to keep housing from being built next to polluting factories, then that should be the EPA's job[0] to enforce.

[0] or local state equivalents

Re: The EPA allows polluters to turn neighborhoods into “sacrifice zones”

#150

Post by rezendi »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #50
rezendi wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.popsci.com/california-coffee-cancer-warning/

This article is not very convincing. I mean sure, the thing about coffee was over the top, but they also stopped requiring that one. Meanwhile the other examples it uses are that you have to be warned when you're being exposed to things like diesel exhaust. Which, um, actually does cause cancer.

Wood dust on furniture? The prospect of alcohol in hotel rooms? Tiffany lamps? Seriously?
Post reply on HN