In the US these are done state by state with little consistency. The rivers and streams here in KS are all muddy and graded accordingly. But when they cross into MO they are suddenly pristine.
Because everyone knows what KS and MO mean, especially on a european sub.
Kentsucky and Mossossoppo.
Let’s make this about 'murica. Hello, fellow 'murican. Did you already coup a government on this fine day to replace their President with some dictator that will gladly sell out his country to our interests in favour of power? I love the smell of terrorism in the morning. Makes my petro dollar extra bloody.
deleted by creator
They’re US states, I’m sure if you really wanted to know which specific ones they are, you can look them up, and if you don’t want to, OP’s point doesn’t actually rely on you knowing that they’re Kansas and Missouri.
I shouldn’t have LU anything, is it SD to type WWs?
VB, VB…
Like they said, it doesn’t really matter if you look them up or not. Either you know what they meant or knowing won’t effect you in any way. Knowing which states those are does not really effect the understanding of the comment, that different regulations lead to different outcomes.
since the general meaning of the post is trivial, which you tried to sum up with this
different regulations lead to different outcomes
all that remains that could be barely interesting are the names of those states.
It may be trivial, but we have to prove trivial statements often. Some people might claim regulations don’t protect the waterways and only harm businesses. They’d be wrong, but it’s still important to give counter-examples to them.
god I’m talking about something completely different 😂😂😂 why did you move all of this to the article’s content? I swear, you answered so fast, it makes me think I’m writing to ai generated content. it may well be, since i wow post and not comment in my c9mment. il leave these like this just to see what happens
The up and downvotes and discussion makes me think:
Haha, can’t believe I ended up with negative karma for the comment. I guess most Europeans feel very strongly about this.
it’s fairly obvious from the context
EDIT: lol, this discussion is insane. So many downvotes haha, what a bunch of weirdos on lemmy.
No? Why would it be?
because the very first sentence speaks of US states, so those acronyms must be for state names?
I didn’t know US speakers refer to their states by acronyms. We don’t do that in my country.
ok. Seems fairly common across the world. In germany it’s common-place as well to use acronyms, sometimes even in speech (mostly for those with longer names like BW for Baden-Württemberg)
I have yet to meet someone who says BW. Maybe your social bubble doesn’t encompass the entire nation.
I have never heard anyone refer to BaWü as BW in speech.
The only Bundesland I have ever encountered that is NRW.Though most wouldn’t do that in an international sub with an audience that obviously won’t know the acronyms.
The rivers and streams here in KS are all muddy and graded accordingly. But when they cross into MO they are suddenly pristine.
The paragon was a concrete-walled canal, entirely devoid of life.
is this going to impact the quality of beer and whiskey?
Quantity is going to rise because now everybody will drink alcohol instead of water. like back In 1800’s
It’s too bad alcohol doesn’t have an effect on microplastics :(
well, maybe I’m onto something…
This is the best summary I could come up with:
While in the EU, England was covered by the water framework directive (WFD), which meant a national chemical and ecological survey of rivers was conducted annually.
Activists say this may make it harder to compare the state of the country’s rivers against those in the EU, and will leave the public in the dark over pollution from sewage and agriculture.
To now not have a full assessment in 2022 and have to wait to 2025 … simply sows confusion and leaves the public in the dark when it comes to properly understanding whether our rivers are getting better or worse.”
Government officials told the stakeholder meeting that in 2022 only a limited number of water bodies were assessed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and budget cuts.
The Liberal Democrats’ environment spokesperson, Tim Farron, said: “Instead of clamping down on sewage dumping, ministers have let water companies off the hook and scaled back assessments so we could know exactly how much damage has been done.
That means abolishing Ofwat and setting up a new regulator with real teeth and ensuring that testing is carried out regularly so we can get a full picture of the damage being done to our countryside.”
The original article contains 802 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
