The work before us is to clean up. Put our infrastructure, energy development, and jobs creation money into clean processes and research for these, and we won't have to say we're sorry. We also won't be stuck paying again for this, for the clean up efforts, which by the sound of the risks here, are likely to not be very effective.

Just imagine one crisis with this, the human effort and costs to clean it up. The permanent re-occurring cost of damage to our land, watersheds, our health and loved ones, our ailing hospital systems must be counted by anyone wanting to think like a business. Watersheds play an integral part in many natural processes such as filtering toxins and are more than water: they comprise the land, features, flora and fauna, which are ways essential to us beyond our (valued) sentimental attachment, love of beauty or creature empathy]. Try, yes, try to create synthetic structures and appliances that can do the work of a wetland. Now figure out how much that would cost, to cover the same area, same efficiency.

Why, oh why are we so eager to apply these human technologies without thinking on the upbeat, knowing full well we'll be stuck in the coda with the damage?

The precedent for our national effort to stand up to this. Farmland, watersheds with water we count on for drinking. States are going to court to divvy up water in dry regions. Water disobeys our desires and plans, and runs and over runs all over the place, too frequently. Just because an entity has gone ahead and invested their dough in this, against the wishes of those with common sense and caution, doesn't mean we have to let this legislation run over us in an approach we know is wrong.