<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Public Wastewater Treatment Plants Off-limits for Fracking Wastes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frackcheckwv.net/2016/06/18/public-wastewater-treatment-plants-off-limits-for-fracking-wastes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2016/06/18/public-wastewater-treatment-plants-off-limits-for-fracking-wastes/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2024 02:06:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mary Wildfire</title>
		<link>https://www.frackcheckwv.net/2016/06/18/public-wastewater-treatment-plants-off-limits-for-fracking-wastes/#comment-188517</link>
		<dc:creator>Mary Wildfire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Jun 2016 11:38:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frackcheckwv.net/?p=17588#comment-188517</guid>
		<description>The thing I found interesting is the API comments at the end. First they say the rule is unnecessary because industry stopped the toxic practice long ago--then they say it was a mistake to &quot;close the door&quot; because maybe future technology would allow them to remove all contaminants (or render them undetectable? Or bribe or remove any inspectors?).

Seems the modern gas industry keeps taking the attitude that they must have no obstacles placed in their path -- even if people get poisoned and resistance ramps up, they must be allowed to drill and frack anywhere, even within towns and next to elementary schools, and even if they&#039;re not currently disposing of their toxic fluids in drinking water, we mustn&#039;t &quot;shut the door&quot;. 

I wonder sometimes why they don&#039;t worry about the PR consequences of harming an ever-expanding list of Americans. Maybe because profit margins are so thin they have to drill where the concentration of gas seems best and take it all while they&#039;re in a spot, not reserving any areas for health protection, instead relying on mantras like &quot;no one has ever been proven to be harmed by fracking&quot; and &quot;I don&#039;t believe in climate change.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing I found interesting is the API comments at the end. First they say the rule is unnecessary because industry stopped the toxic practice long ago&#8211;then they say it was a mistake to &#8220;close the door&#8221; because maybe future technology would allow them to remove all contaminants (or render them undetectable? Or bribe or remove any inspectors?).</p>
<p>Seems the modern gas industry keeps taking the attitude that they must have no obstacles placed in their path &#8212; even if people get poisoned and resistance ramps up, they must be allowed to drill and frack anywhere, even within towns and next to elementary schools, and even if they&#8217;re not currently disposing of their toxic fluids in drinking water, we mustn&#8217;t &#8220;shut the door&#8221;. </p>
<p>I wonder sometimes why they don&#8217;t worry about the PR consequences of harming an ever-expanding list of Americans. Maybe because profit margins are so thin they have to drill where the concentration of gas seems best and take it all while they&#8217;re in a spot, not reserving any areas for health protection, instead relying on mantras like &#8220;no one has ever been proven to be harmed by fracking&#8221; and &#8220;I don&#8217;t believe in climate change.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
