The EPA serves an important role, and should exist simply because people and corporations don't always align their practices with the best interests of the environment. I just think they are far too overreaching and less helpful than they could be, just like most other government institutions.
True. Absolutely agree. The way to reign these agencies in is oversight, to limit their budgets and to have a mediation court for all the little guys like your example that get crushed under the weight of bureaucracy. I too have suffered at the hands of these types of technocrats.
In my case it was at the hands of the California Air Resources Board. They govern air quality here and are more strict than the feds are. There was a scientific study that supported the theory that diesel exhaust particulates were causing a high rate of asthma in inner city children. So they set policy to clean it up as fast as they could and started mandating emission standards for on road and off road diesel engines.
Problem number one is, they mandated standards that the technology didn't exist to comply with, so they came up with a tiered schedule with artificial timelines. I have heard that Caterpillar has quit the California market as a result of these demands. Basically, it requires every operator of diesel engines in California to be using the unicorn "tier 4" engine by 2020.
Problem number two is, these mandates are retroactive, so if you own an old truck with a tier 1 engine, you must now retrofit it with very expensive, unreliable and questionable equipment for now and then replace the entire engine by 2020. Big fleet operators and transportation companies are dealing with this OK, but the little guys like me... we're ****'d. If you don't have all the money for a new truck, tractor, boat, generator, etc, the state will graciously loan you some
if you qualify.
Problem number three is, the original study on asthma that got all this started has since been debunked. Further study over the last ten years has shown that asthma in children doesn't occur in any higher rates in the cities vs. country. It is about the same. It doesn't matter, the law still stands.
I'm sure that less soot in the air is good thing regardless, so I'm OK with new technology to reduce that. My beef is with the militant way they chose to bring about this change. They should have done like they did with the cars and mandated that all new cars being sold must meet the new standard and let it be at that. Over time the old equipment would wear out and be retired naturally. There was no need to force economic hardship on people. None at all.
Environmental agencies do serve an important purpose, but indeed they have been given too much power to create policy on whim and to punish people indiscriminately and without consideration. A reform of these agencies would be quite welcome, abolishion of them would not.