KarateKid72 t1_jcg9fff wrote

I would say that, having lived through the cold war, that anti-Russian sentiment was extremely high under Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Reagan. Cuba and Vietnam were both proxy wars with USSR during the Cold War. I’m sorry you’re too much of a child to remember those days, as well as the McCarthy Red Scare of the 50s. Hate is indeed the correct word. Just go back and watch video footage, newsreels or just look at the films produced during those days. The US literally supplied arms to the Taliban to fight Russia for us. Read some history before making hugely ignorant statements.


KarateKid72 t1_jc6vtmo wrote

I’m sorry you are so out of touch here. The GOP is a huge proponent of Russia. You must have missed all the praise heaped on Russia by the GOP for the last 6 years but it’s easy enough to look up if you aren’t lazy. You can start by looking up the Trump administrations negotiations of regulations, the praise of Putin by Trump, McConnell, Graham (to name a few) and then move on to the actual data.


KarateKid72 t1_j8uevnx wrote

My career has been in CWA/SDWA/RCRA analyses. The reason I brought up EPAMethod 624.1 is that there is a requirement for the sample to be heated during analysis to 80C. The analysis gets tricky if the sample is preserved to pH<2 (it hydrolyzes and would give low bias on the results).

The PQLs for SVOCs are a different matter. They are higher than I would expect for storm water given the advances in technology available. I can think of several commercial labs that could achieve much lower limits, which would be more protective. And there are 3 different sites. Two have very low PQLs (the lowest verifiable concentration, usually the lowest standard in the calibration curves), but site 2 has much higher elevated PQLs. That leads me to believe they didn’t collect enough sample (a liter is required for SVOCs, whereas 40mL is required for VOCs). I assume the DRO/GRO/ORO are from the fuel spill of the train itself and not one of the cars.


KarateKid72 t1_j8u8d5k wrote

That’s some questionable numbers on the surface waters. A lot of J-flags, especially on compounds like Phenol. 8270-SIM could get better results on the SVOCs. I saw a hit for 1,4-dioxane too. Fascinating. I’d love to know if they used a heated purge, since that’s a requirement for 624.1.


KarateKid72 t1_ix19ns1 wrote

It’s a straw man argument. He’s been making several of those already, like the alcohol argument.

What we can anticipate is increased costs as obesity increases as a percentage of the population. Things like joint replacements. Cancers. Respiratory and circulatory issues. Not surprisingly, it’s also a strong indicator of economic disparity in this country.

What I’m surprised we haven’t heard is some sort of BS about the metabolically healthy obese individual. I hear that a lot in body positivity groups, despite research to the contrary.


KarateKid72 t1_iwirp6e wrote

If you worked in the industry, you’d know that what gets caught in a bar screen isn’t what makes to the outfall. The variation between pretreatment, influent and effluent is quite large. To say nothing of the differences in Coliform bacteria populations upstream, downstream. Influent and effluent.