BP America’s plans to dump more pollutants into the Great Lakes resulted in an unprecedented gathering of environmentalists, a company executive and public officials from several states and levels of government in Chicago this week.
They faced a “virtual firestorm of concern” over a new permit that allows BP to discharge increased levels of ammonia and sludge into Lake Michigan from its Whiting, Ind., oil refinery, said a top federal environmental official who convened the summit.
“As the agency with the ultimate responsibility for protecting the Great Lakes, we feel it is time to get beyond these headlines and the emotions, no matter how justified, and begin a more practical discussion,” said U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regional Administrator Mary Gade
BP has a valid permit for the wastewater discharge, Gade said, and she stands by the agency’s decision to issue it.
Although the company already has a valid permit, BP America’s Vice Chairman Stephen Elbert said he would “take all the proposals (from the summit) to heart.”
The permit, which took effect Aug. 1, allows for the increased discharge the company anticipates as it begins processing heavy crude oil from Canada, Elbert said. That’s not expected to begin until 2011 at the earliest.
“The project at our Whiting refinery will bring into the country and into the Midwest a secure source of crude oil,” Elbert said. “Between now and 2011, there will be no increase, no change, from that refinery.”
Disputing the need for the new permit, Chicago’s Chief Environmental Officer Sadhu Johnston said BP didn’t evaluate all the options for reducing pollutants. Johnston identified seven technologies on the market the city official said the company didn’t consider, including storm water management practices.
“We encourage BP to review the alternatives we’ve identified,” Johnston said. “And we look forward to continuing to work with them to come up with a wastewater treatment plan that does not add additional pollutants to Lake Michigan.”
In a 16-page public document, the city provided details and diagrams of alternate technologies for the BP refinery and measures that could maintain or possibly lower the levels of discharged pollutants.
“We believe economic development and the environment go hand in hand,” Johnston said. “This message is prominently part of BP’s advertising, and we are sure that they can make it a prominent part of their actions.”
U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Illinois) said it was obvious by the day’s discussion that not all ideas were considered, but there’s still an opportunity to change it.
“I’m going to write a letter with my colleagues of both parties throughout Congress to investors of British Petroleum (BP), so they understand that there are consequences to a company that advertises one way and conducts its business another way,” Emanuel said. “I hope BP would reconsider how they approach this project.”
Emanuel helped write relevant guidelines and is a sponsor of the Great Lakes Restoration Act that, if passed, would provide additional protection and funding for what he called “our national park” – no different from Yellowstone or the Grand Canyon.
Emanuel also is working with U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) to raise awareness by running radio ads and meeting with BP executives and citizens. So far, they’ve collected 20,000 signatures, he said, and will continue these efforts in coming weeks.
In addition, Emanuel said he plans to review the EPA’s role in issuing and agreeing to the permit, which he believes violates the Clean Water Act.
In response, U.S. EPA’s Gade said she welcomed any investigation and was “very comfortable” that her staff did a thorough job and that the permit complies with the Clean Water Act.
“I want to know that the review process was thorough and exhaustive,” Emanuel said. “In one meeting, we learned more ideas than clearly months of activity. It’s an outrage. How is that possible?”
A summit participant from the Chicago-based Alliance for the Great Lakes announced the group filed an appeal of the BP permit for water discharge on the basis that proper notice was not served about the final permit issuance, as required under Indiana law.
“We would like to see solutions that minimize pollutants into the Great Lakes,” said the organization’s president, Cameron Davis. “We are filing a petition to appeal the permit to make sure that these ideas get proper consideration as they should have in the first place.”
Noting that 39 million Americans get their drinking water from the Great Lakes every day, Emanuel promised to give “proper oversight” on an issue that’s struck a nerve with the public.
BP’s Elbert said the company plans to move forward with the project, which is currently in the design phase, and the company would listen to the suggestions made at the summit.
“I believe the permit that we have been issued under the laws of the United States and the laws of Indiana protect the water,” Elbert said. “I hear, and we are very sensitive to the fact, that others believe we should do more and we are committed to looking at options.”
Listen to Metropolitan Water Reclamation Commissioner Debra Shore and Ald. Joe Moore and others discuss the problem at the YearlyKos.
Categories:
Eco & Environment Nationwide Public
Tags:
bp america dick durbin environmental protection agency great lakes rahm emanuel