• Xella@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    14 hours ago

    Wow… What can even be done about this? I don’t want to bathe in and consume shit water :(

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Basically, the EPA has been saying “we don’t care what you actually release, so long as the water you release it into is at least [this] clean” after you do it." With this approach, the city has to monitor the water, and they become responsible for whatever anybody dumps in the water anywhere, even outside the city’s jurisdiction. When a cruise ship dumps its sewage tanks overboard 30 miles up current, the city is responsible for that dumping, even though they have no jurisdiction over the ship.

      The court said this isn’t acceptable. They said the EPA - not the city - is responsible for the water. The EPA must specify exactly what can and cannot be released. If they aren’t satisfied with the water quality, they have to tell the city to release less, and/or go after the other entities doing the dumping.

      This ruling is much ado about nothing.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 hours ago

          No, that’s not true at all. The EPA can still set specific standards on what, when, how much, and how often they can dump.

          They just can’t offload responsibility for ensuring water quality to the dumper: They have to actually enforce their dumping standards.