sunandsand
Gold Member
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2020
- Messages
- 308
- Tractor
- Kubota B2601
Gotta neighbor who politicizes EVERYTHING. He was going to buy an 8,000 gallon tank and fill it up with diesel so he'd never run out. The fact that he'll never use that much fuel in his entire life is unimportant - he'll HAVE it. He has one Kubota mid-size tractor and an older GM diesel truck (which he doesn't drive much).
Anyway, it is all the fault of (fill in the politician to blame today) that the price of diesel has gone up to where he can't afford to fill that tank, which he hasn't bought anyway, because of them etc. etc. etc. (Covid has nothing to do with it, OPEC has nothing to do with it, refinery fires have nothing to do with it, hurricanes in the Gulf have nothing to do with it . . . you get the idea.)
Actually, all these evil forces arrayed against HIM PERSONALLY (to hear it told) may have done him a favor. If he fills that tank and it leaks or grows algae or whatever, now he'll have 8,000 gallons of essentially unusable fuel unless he treats it with gallons and gallons of algae killing chemistry and fixes the leaks - if he can find them.
He'll also be talking to the EPA and the local environmental regulators who are not a very pleasant or understanding crowd (ask me how I know this) about his brand new contaminated property which is now eligible to be an EPA superfund site. Note that the EPA only designates, they aren't paying for the cleanup (although some federal funds - i.e. our tax dollars - are sometimes available).
The water table is pretty high here, too, so he'd be contaminating multiple square miles of the aquifer as well - oh boy oh boy.
Environmental cleanups on this scale are astronomically expensive. When I was a mortgage broker, banks flatly refused to lend on gas stations because if the borrower defaulted, the owner (now the bank) has to pay for the cleanup. The fact that the bank didn't cause the leak is immaterial, the bank is the owner and the bank has to pay, period. (Not that I have a huge problem with that, but anyway . . . ) Small spills and small amounts of contaminated dirt can run up bills of over a quarter of a million dollars, which makes it pretty obvious why banks won't lend on gas stations. There are plenty of other borrowers out there who won't break the bank - no pun intended - if they default.
The contaminated dirt has to be dug up, trucked off to an EPA approved facility and incinerated. We're talking six or seven figures on small to medium size spills. Even on small spills or small leaky underground tanks, I have seen them require a power driven ventilation system running 24/7/365, and *somebody* has to pay the power company for the electricity - the EPA isn't real picky as to who.
Probably the best thing that could have happened to him was the increase in the price of fuel, it kept him from getting himself into some REALLY big time and expensive trouble.
He's a good guy, I'd rather hear him complain about his lost opportunity to stock up forever than listen to him wail about the EPA coming after him and fining him a bajillion dollars. ("Will Sir be paying with cash, check, or credit card?")
Best Regards,
Mike/Florida
Anyway, it is all the fault of (fill in the politician to blame today) that the price of diesel has gone up to where he can't afford to fill that tank, which he hasn't bought anyway, because of them etc. etc. etc. (Covid has nothing to do with it, OPEC has nothing to do with it, refinery fires have nothing to do with it, hurricanes in the Gulf have nothing to do with it . . . you get the idea.)
Actually, all these evil forces arrayed against HIM PERSONALLY (to hear it told) may have done him a favor. If he fills that tank and it leaks or grows algae or whatever, now he'll have 8,000 gallons of essentially unusable fuel unless he treats it with gallons and gallons of algae killing chemistry and fixes the leaks - if he can find them.
He'll also be talking to the EPA and the local environmental regulators who are not a very pleasant or understanding crowd (ask me how I know this) about his brand new contaminated property which is now eligible to be an EPA superfund site. Note that the EPA only designates, they aren't paying for the cleanup (although some federal funds - i.e. our tax dollars - are sometimes available).
The water table is pretty high here, too, so he'd be contaminating multiple square miles of the aquifer as well - oh boy oh boy.
Environmental cleanups on this scale are astronomically expensive. When I was a mortgage broker, banks flatly refused to lend on gas stations because if the borrower defaulted, the owner (now the bank) has to pay for the cleanup. The fact that the bank didn't cause the leak is immaterial, the bank is the owner and the bank has to pay, period. (Not that I have a huge problem with that, but anyway . . . ) Small spills and small amounts of contaminated dirt can run up bills of over a quarter of a million dollars, which makes it pretty obvious why banks won't lend on gas stations. There are plenty of other borrowers out there who won't break the bank - no pun intended - if they default.
The contaminated dirt has to be dug up, trucked off to an EPA approved facility and incinerated. We're talking six or seven figures on small to medium size spills. Even on small spills or small leaky underground tanks, I have seen them require a power driven ventilation system running 24/7/365, and *somebody* has to pay the power company for the electricity - the EPA isn't real picky as to who.
Probably the best thing that could have happened to him was the increase in the price of fuel, it kept him from getting himself into some REALLY big time and expensive trouble.
He's a good guy, I'd rather hear him complain about his lost opportunity to stock up forever than listen to him wail about the EPA coming after him and fining him a bajillion dollars. ("Will Sir be paying with cash, check, or credit card?")
Best Regards,
Mike/Florida