Home » Opinion » Editorials
October 01. 2012 8:22PM
Great Bay cleaning: The EPA vs. NH taxpayers
Seacoast “greens” who think the Environmental Protection Agency can do no wrong and businesses can do no right when it comes to protecting the environment must be struggling to decide which side to take in the EPA's effort to impose huge emissions cleanup costs on several Seacoast municipalities.
Four years ago the EPA issued a new nitrogen water quality standard for Dover, Exeter, Newmarket, Portsmouth and Rochester. It requires the municipalities to release no more than 3 micrograms of nitrogen per liter in their treated wastewater. That is the lowest level that any current technology allows. The state's Department of Environmental Services has followed the EPA in requiring the new standard.
Hey, it's all for cleaner water, so why not, right? Because, as the municipalities argue, the government's research connecting higher nitrogen levels in the Great Bay Estuary with lower eelgrass levels might well be flawed. (Eelgrass in coastal waterways provides marine wildlife with an essential habitat.) The communities' own study suggests that the previous decline in eelgrass levels was not caused by nitrogen, and that eelgrass has made a big comeback in the last few years.
Also, the communities say it would cost them $588 million to comply with the 3 micrograms rule. They have proposed dropping their nitrogen emissions to 8 micrograms per liter. That would improve nitrogen levels but save the communities $224 million, they say.
At issue here is not just the science. It is the responsiveness of the EPA. These communities have tried in vain for years to get the EPA to reconsider its order. Its bureaucrats do not care what the costs are. What's $224 million to some Washington bureaucrat who doesn't have to live and pay taxes in Exeter or Portsmouth? (That is why Rep. Frank Guinta has filed legislation to force the EPA to reconsider its rule.)
As these Seacoast communities are finding out, the EPA is a fearsome, cold-hearted master. American businesses have known this for decades. They are subject daily to the EPA's bullying. Environmental activists shrug off business complaints and say greedy capitalists don't care about the planet. But it's not about who cares more. Surely the elected officials of these five Seacoast towns care more about the local water quality than some scientist in Washington does. It's about having a responsive, reasonable government that balances costs and benefits and listens to its people. That's all these communities — and most businesses hit by the EPA's costly decrees — are asking for. It is not an unreasonable request.
Four years ago the EPA issued a new nitrogen water quality standard for Dover, Exeter, Newmarket, Portsmouth and Rochester. It requires the municipalities to release no more than 3 micrograms of nitrogen per liter in their treated wastewater. That is the lowest level that any current technology allows. The state's Department of Environmental Services has followed the EPA in requiring the new standard.
Hey, it's all for cleaner water, so why not, right? Because, as the municipalities argue, the government's research connecting higher nitrogen levels in the Great Bay Estuary with lower eelgrass levels might well be flawed. (Eelgrass in coastal waterways provides marine wildlife with an essential habitat.) The communities' own study suggests that the previous decline in eelgrass levels was not caused by nitrogen, and that eelgrass has made a big comeback in the last few years.
Also, the communities say it would cost them $588 million to comply with the 3 micrograms rule. They have proposed dropping their nitrogen emissions to 8 micrograms per liter. That would improve nitrogen levels but save the communities $224 million, they say.
At issue here is not just the science. It is the responsiveness of the EPA. These communities have tried in vain for years to get the EPA to reconsider its order. Its bureaucrats do not care what the costs are. What's $224 million to some Washington bureaucrat who doesn't have to live and pay taxes in Exeter or Portsmouth? (That is why Rep. Frank Guinta has filed legislation to force the EPA to reconsider its rule.)
As these Seacoast communities are finding out, the EPA is a fearsome, cold-hearted master. American businesses have known this for decades. They are subject daily to the EPA's bullying. Environmental activists shrug off business complaints and say greedy capitalists don't care about the planet. But it's not about who cares more. Surely the elected officials of these five Seacoast towns care more about the local water quality than some scientist in Washington does. It's about having a responsive, reasonable government that balances costs and benefits and listens to its people. That's all these communities — and most businesses hit by the EPA's costly decrees — are asking for. It is not an unreasonable request.
- Fisher Cats score in 9th to win - 0
- Former NASCAR driver Trickle dead in apparent suicide - 0
- NHIAA boxscores, summaries for May 14, 2013 - 0
- Manchester's Gill Stadium nearing centenial rededication, still going strong - 0
- Red Sox lose to Rangers - 0
- Glenn, Nolan power Fisher Cats to win - 0
- All done: Monarchs elminated from AHL playoffs three games to one - 0
- NH College Roundup: Evans in Pats' rookie camp - 0
- Derryfield defeats Central girls in lacrosse - 0
NH College Notebook: Honors keep coming for several Granite State athletes
READER COMMENTS: 0- Survivors pulled from Oklahoma tornado debris as toll falls - 1
- UPDATED: Chester police seek two men in armed home invasion - 1
- Intruder, a burglar, and attempted break-in keep Manchester police busy - 0
- Afterschool activities canceled in Jaffrey - 0
- Banker convicted of fraud in scheme involving press maker exec - 0
- Mass. man charged in Nashua hit-and-run - 1
- Bedford's Shapiro hits lacrosse milestone - 0
- NHIAA boxscores, summaries for May 20, 2013 - 0
- Police say man held girlfriend in car, arrest him - 0
Asphalt truck overturns in Jaffrey
READER COMMENTS: 0
Sorry, no question available



