The Environmental Protection Agency on Tuesday released a long-suppressed report by George W. Bush administration officials who had concluded -- based on science -- that the government should begin regulating greenhouse gas emissions because global warming posed serious risks to the country.
The report, known as an "endangerment finding," was done in 2007. The Bush White House refused to make it public because it opposed new government efforts to regulate the gases most scientists see as the major cause of global warming.
The existence of the finding -- and the refusal of the Bush administration to make it public -- were already known. But no copy of the document had been released until Tuesday.
The document "demonstrates that in 2007 the science was as clear as it is today," said Adora Andy, EPA spokeswoman. "The conclusions reached then by EPA scientists should have been made public and should have been considered."
The Bush administration EPA draft was released in response to a public records request under the Freedom of Information Act by the environmental trade publication Greenwire.
A finding that greenhouse gases and global warming pose serious risks to the nation is a necessary step in instituting government regulation. President Obama and congressional Democrats are seeking major climate legislation, but the administration has indicated that if Congress fails to act, it might use an EPA finding to move toward regulation on its own.
In April, the administration released its proposal for an endangerment finding. The newly released document from the Bush EPA shows that much of the Obama document embraces the earlier, suppressed finding word for word.
"Both reach the same conclusion -- that the public is endangered and regulation is required," said Jason Burnett, a former associate deputy administrator who resigned from the EPA in June 2008 amid frustration over the Bush administration's inaction on climate change. "Science and the law transcend politics."
The 2007 draft offers an unequivocal endorsement of the prevailing views among climate scientists. It includes a declaration that the "U.S. and the rest of the world are experiencing the effects of climate change now" and warns that in the U.S., those effects could lead to drought, more frequent hurricanes and other extreme weather events, increased respiratory disease and a rise in heat-related deaths.
The Obama version of the finding has gone through the necessary hearings and public comments. A final EPA version is expected to be released soon.
Although the 2007 and 2009 findings are nearly identical in their conclusions about climate change, the Bush version is far less detailed.
A current EPA official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, said the sparse descriptions in the 2007 version suggested that EPA officials were worried about how the White House would respond.
"They honed it down to the essential language to explain an endangerment finding," the official said. "In 2009, those constraints are removed. . . . You don't see those same linguistic gymnastics."
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Colour blindness corrected by gene therapy
Researchers have used gene therapy to restore colour vision in two adult monkeys that have been unable to distinguish between red and green hues since birth — raising the hope of curing colour blindness and other visual disorders in humans.
"This is a truly amazing study," says András Komáromy, a vision researcher and veterinary ophthalmologist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, who was not involved in the research.
Providing green jobs & reducing carbon footprint
The E-Hanger company is proud to announce their entry into the 2009 annual waste minimization awards slated for Thursday, October 22, 2009 at Atlantis Pavilions - Ontario Place. The event is organized by the Recycling Council of Ontario.
The 25-year-old contest rewards achievements in environmental sustainability and waste reduction innovations — two areas that E-Hanger excels in. This year’s event special guest speaker is the Hon. John Gerretsen, Minister of the Environment
First launched in Toronto, but now available all across Canada, the E-Hanger is manufactured from post consumer waste board and is printed with eco vegetable oil based inks. Its durability and eco-friendly properties have made the product an ideal replacement for the millions of non-recyclable wire clothes hangers that are dumped into Canadian landfills each year.
Through the replacement of wire and plastic hangers for eco-friendly clothing hangers, E-Hanger will substantially reduce the carbon footprint of dry cleaners by eliminating their large contribution of wire hangers to landfills. In turn, consumers who use dry cleaning services will also be reducing their carbon footprints, by bringing their clean clothes home on 100% recyclable hangers instead of wire or plastic ones.
The addition of green jobs is also a stimulus attribute to the local economy that E-Hanger provides. Green jobs are provided in the field for sales professionals, graphic designers, public relation officers and web designers.
About E-Hanger
E-Hanger In-Home Media delivers marketing solutions such as direct response campaigns, coupons, sampling or branded messaging throughout Canada directly into consumers homes via its eco-friendly clothing hangers. We guarantee 100% view rate and in-home reach of your advertising message. Advertising programs are delivered to mature individuals who are career driven, command high disposable income, and are determined to know about the latest trends and products.
The 25-year-old contest rewards achievements in environmental sustainability and waste reduction innovations — two areas that E-Hanger excels in. This year’s event special guest speaker is the Hon. John Gerretsen, Minister of the Environment
First launched in Toronto, but now available all across Canada, the E-Hanger is manufactured from post consumer waste board and is printed with eco vegetable oil based inks. Its durability and eco-friendly properties have made the product an ideal replacement for the millions of non-recyclable wire clothes hangers that are dumped into Canadian landfills each year.
Through the replacement of wire and plastic hangers for eco-friendly clothing hangers, E-Hanger will substantially reduce the carbon footprint of dry cleaners by eliminating their large contribution of wire hangers to landfills. In turn, consumers who use dry cleaning services will also be reducing their carbon footprints, by bringing their clean clothes home on 100% recyclable hangers instead of wire or plastic ones.
The addition of green jobs is also a stimulus attribute to the local economy that E-Hanger provides. Green jobs are provided in the field for sales professionals, graphic designers, public relation officers and web designers.
About E-Hanger
E-Hanger In-Home Media delivers marketing solutions such as direct response campaigns, coupons, sampling or branded messaging throughout Canada directly into consumers homes via its eco-friendly clothing hangers. We guarantee 100% view rate and in-home reach of your advertising message. Advertising programs are delivered to mature individuals who are career driven, command high disposable income, and are determined to know about the latest trends and products.
China Finds More Cases of Lead in Children
Lead poisoning continues to emerge among children in China despite growing public protests, with officials revealing Tuesday that tests showed nearly 1,000 children had excessive lead in their blood, and a factory owner acknowledging some responsibility.
Health officials in the city of Jiyuan in central China's Henan province tested 2,743 children living in a region with some three dozen smelters.
This followed wide-scale lead poisoning in an industrial cluster in neighboring Shaanxi province. Henan officials found signs of lead poisoning in 968 children under the age of 14, the state-run Xinhua news agency reported.
Xinhua reported on the local government's efforts to move the children living closest to the factories, and cited a top executive acknowledging responsibility.
Yang Anguo, chairman of Yuguang Gold & Lead Group, the largest lead smelter in China, was quoted by Xinhua as saying, "We do bear responsibility for the pollution. Some pollution has accumulated over the past 20 years or more, and the plant is too near homes."
Cases of lead poisoning and other pollution have become a distressingly familiar byproduct of China's unchecked economic growth.
But, increasingly, parents are trying to fight back, and the state-controlled press has begun to shine a spotlight on the worst violations as the central government, wanting to be seen as fighting to clean up and shut down the dirtiest factories, seeks to maintain stability in the face of growing anger at the abuses.
In recent months, thousands of children from areas near smelters have been found to have excessive levels of lead in their blood, resulting in occasionally violent protests.
Demonstrations by villagers upset over the lead poisoning of 851 children in northwest China's Shaanxi province led authorities to close the smelting plant responsible for the lead discharges in August.
Soon after, a larger case of lead poisoning was reported in Hunan, in which more than 1,300 children were found to have excessive lead levels, and more than 200 children in southwestern Yunnan province were found to have signs of lead poisoning.
The official acknowledgment of responsibility in Xinhua's report Tuesday is a marked change from a similar case in 2006, where a smaller-scale lead-poisoning incident in the remote western China province of Gansu was met with official stonewalling as the victims fought for compensation and medical attention for their children.
Last month, China's environment minister, Zhou Shengxian, urged new methods to deal with heavy-metal poisoning, calling for "powerful measures" to prevent pollution by materials like lead. But the government has had little success in past efforts to clean up the industry and faces significant obstacles, such as weak enforcement mechanisms.
Lead poisoning can cause permanent learning disabilities in children, and in high concentrations can cause organ failure or death.
But lead is an important component of China's economic boom, used in the production of trinkets and increasingly in the batteries of electric bicycles and cars. China has emerged as the world's biggest car market.
Health officials in the city of Jiyuan in central China's Henan province tested 2,743 children living in a region with some three dozen smelters.
Reuters
A man wipes tears off the face of his grandson, who was diagnosed with having excessive lead in his blood.
Xinhua reported on the local government's efforts to move the children living closest to the factories, and cited a top executive acknowledging responsibility.
Yang Anguo, chairman of Yuguang Gold & Lead Group, the largest lead smelter in China, was quoted by Xinhua as saying, "We do bear responsibility for the pollution. Some pollution has accumulated over the past 20 years or more, and the plant is too near homes."
Cases of lead poisoning and other pollution have become a distressingly familiar byproduct of China's unchecked economic growth.
But, increasingly, parents are trying to fight back, and the state-controlled press has begun to shine a spotlight on the worst violations as the central government, wanting to be seen as fighting to clean up and shut down the dirtiest factories, seeks to maintain stability in the face of growing anger at the abuses.
In recent months, thousands of children from areas near smelters have been found to have excessive levels of lead in their blood, resulting in occasionally violent protests.
Demonstrations by villagers upset over the lead poisoning of 851 children in northwest China's Shaanxi province led authorities to close the smelting plant responsible for the lead discharges in August.
Soon after, a larger case of lead poisoning was reported in Hunan, in which more than 1,300 children were found to have excessive lead levels, and more than 200 children in southwestern Yunnan province were found to have signs of lead poisoning.
The official acknowledgment of responsibility in Xinhua's report Tuesday is a marked change from a similar case in 2006, where a smaller-scale lead-poisoning incident in the remote western China province of Gansu was met with official stonewalling as the victims fought for compensation and medical attention for their children.
Last month, China's environment minister, Zhou Shengxian, urged new methods to deal with heavy-metal poisoning, calling for "powerful measures" to prevent pollution by materials like lead. But the government has had little success in past efforts to clean up the industry and faces significant obstacles, such as weak enforcement mechanisms.
Lead poisoning can cause permanent learning disabilities in children, and in high concentrations can cause organ failure or death.
But lead is an important component of China's economic boom, used in the production of trinkets and increasingly in the batteries of electric bicycles and cars. China has emerged as the world's biggest car market.
Australia fails to plug oil leak
A second attempt to stop oil pouring into Australian waters after a rig accident in the Timor Sea has failed.
It is almost two months since oil began flowing from the West Atlas drilling platform that lies about 200km (125 miles) off the West Australian coast. The rig's operators have said that plugging the leak is an "extraordinarily complex" task.
Environmental groups have warned that the slick is threatening wildlife, including endangered turtles.
Conservationists have said this is Australia's most damaging oil spill in 25 years.
Each day for almost two months, hundreds of barrels have been flowing into the Timor Sea, although officials have conceded that it is impossible to know just how much oil has been spilt.
The slick is about 160km from the Western Australian mainland, and slightly further from the Indonesian coast.
Two attempts to plug the leak have failed.
Engineers have tried to cap a small hole 25cm wide that lies deep beneath the seabed.
Extraordinary difficulty
They are expected to have another go towards the end of the week.
Scott Ludlam, a Senator for the Australian Greens, says it is a complex task.
"It underlines the extraordinary difficulty that they are facing in plugging the well," he said of the latest failure.
"They are trying to hit a needle in a haystack 2.5km below sea level. So, it is not surprising, I suppose, that they've failed to plug the well on their second attempt.
"This is the worst oil spill in Australian waters since the mid-1980s and it really does not give us high hopes for the huge expansion of the oil and gas industry that is planned in the region," he added.
The Australian Maritime Safety Authority has said the flow of oil from the damaged well appears to be slowing.
Boats have been spraying chemicals to help disperse the slick and stop it spreading.
A spokeswoman has insisted that the impact on wildlife had been minimal.
Environmentalists, however, worry about the long-term effects of contamination on vulnerable marine species, including flat-back turtles, dolphins and whales.
Analysis of cellphone studies finds tumor risk
The answer to the question of whether cellphones increase the risk of brain, head and neck tumors is truly a matter of whom you ask.
An analysis published Tuesday of data from 23 epidemiological studies found no connection between cellphone use and the development of cancerous or benign tumors. But when eight of the studies that were conducted with the most scientific rigor were analyzed, cellphone users were shown to have a 10% to 30% increased risk of tumors compared with people who rarely or never used the phones. The risk was highest among those who had used cellphones for 10 years or more.
"The other group of 15 studies were not as high-quality," said study coauthor Joel M. Moskowitz, director of the UC Berkeley Center for Family and Community Health. "They either found no association or a negative association or a protective effect -- which I don't think anyone would have predicted."
The main message of the analysis, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, is that studies should be conducted so that findings are harder to refute, he said.
In recent years, concerns have arisen that the radio-frequency energy emitted by cellphones may be high enough to cause tumors and other health problems. But the risks are hotly debated.
"I went into this really dubious that anything was going on," Moskowitz said. "Overall, you find no difference. But when you start teasing the studies apart and doing these subgroup analyses, you do find there is reason to be concerned."
All of the studies were case control studies, which means researchers interviewed people on their past use of cellphones. Some of the people, referred to as controls, had no history of brain tumors; others, known as cases, had been diagnosed with brain tumors. The studies encompassed 37,916 people.
Eight of the studies were singled out as more reliable because the researchers were not told which people had tumors and because the studies were not supported with mobile phone industry funding. However, seven of those eight studies were conducted by a single researcher, Dr. Lennart Hardell, an oncologist in Sweden.
Some of the less-stringent studies were part of the Interphone project coordinated by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer. Interphone is funded in part by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum and the Global System for Mobile Communication Assn.
"Hardell had the higher-quality studies in which he was blinded to the cases and controls," Moskowitz said. "Presumably, he would have less opportunity to bias the results. But was it better methodology? Or was it something about Sweden? More people there live in rural communities, and maybe they were exposed to higher levels of energy."
More radio-frequency energy is typically needed to operate cellphones in rural areas.
Interphone study investigators are not influenced by the funding source, said Michael Milligan, secretary-general of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum, based in Hong Kong.
"The Mobile Manufacturers Forum has provided part funding for the Interphone study that has complemented other public sources of funding -- such as the European Commission and other national bodies," Milligan said in an e-mail. "In providing funding, we have done so on terms that guarantee Interphone's complete scientific independence."
The bulk of all scientific studies, Milligan said, reveals no increased risk of head and neck tumors. However, conclusions should await higher-quality studies that follow diverse groups of people, both phone users and nonusers, over a long period of time, said Dr. Seung-Kwon Myung, lead author of the meta-analysis, from the National Cancer Center in Goyang, South Korea.
"Larger, prospective, cohort studies, independently conducted from the mobile industry, are required to confirm the relationship between mobile phone use and tumor risk," he said.
An analysis published Tuesday of data from 23 epidemiological studies found no connection between cellphone use and the development of cancerous or benign tumors. But when eight of the studies that were conducted with the most scientific rigor were analyzed, cellphone users were shown to have a 10% to 30% increased risk of tumors compared with people who rarely or never used the phones. The risk was highest among those who had used cellphones for 10 years or more.
"The other group of 15 studies were not as high-quality," said study coauthor Joel M. Moskowitz, director of the UC Berkeley Center for Family and Community Health. "They either found no association or a negative association or a protective effect -- which I don't think anyone would have predicted."
The main message of the analysis, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, is that studies should be conducted so that findings are harder to refute, he said.
In recent years, concerns have arisen that the radio-frequency energy emitted by cellphones may be high enough to cause tumors and other health problems. But the risks are hotly debated.
"I went into this really dubious that anything was going on," Moskowitz said. "Overall, you find no difference. But when you start teasing the studies apart and doing these subgroup analyses, you do find there is reason to be concerned."
All of the studies were case control studies, which means researchers interviewed people on their past use of cellphones. Some of the people, referred to as controls, had no history of brain tumors; others, known as cases, had been diagnosed with brain tumors. The studies encompassed 37,916 people.
Eight of the studies were singled out as more reliable because the researchers were not told which people had tumors and because the studies were not supported with mobile phone industry funding. However, seven of those eight studies were conducted by a single researcher, Dr. Lennart Hardell, an oncologist in Sweden.
Some of the less-stringent studies were part of the Interphone project coordinated by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer. Interphone is funded in part by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum and the Global System for Mobile Communication Assn.
"Hardell had the higher-quality studies in which he was blinded to the cases and controls," Moskowitz said. "Presumably, he would have less opportunity to bias the results. But was it better methodology? Or was it something about Sweden? More people there live in rural communities, and maybe they were exposed to higher levels of energy."
More radio-frequency energy is typically needed to operate cellphones in rural areas.
Interphone study investigators are not influenced by the funding source, said Michael Milligan, secretary-general of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum, based in Hong Kong.
"The Mobile Manufacturers Forum has provided part funding for the Interphone study that has complemented other public sources of funding -- such as the European Commission and other national bodies," Milligan said in an e-mail. "In providing funding, we have done so on terms that guarantee Interphone's complete scientific independence."
The bulk of all scientific studies, Milligan said, reveals no increased risk of head and neck tumors. However, conclusions should await higher-quality studies that follow diverse groups of people, both phone users and nonusers, over a long period of time, said Dr. Seung-Kwon Myung, lead author of the meta-analysis, from the National Cancer Center in Goyang, South Korea.
"Larger, prospective, cohort studies, independently conducted from the mobile industry, are required to confirm the relationship between mobile phone use and tumor risk," he said.
Texas heavy industries worry about EPA crackdown
For 15 years, environmentalists have complained that state regulations have allowed the powerful oil and chemical industries to skirt Clean Air Act standards in Texas, the nation's foremost producer of industrial air pollution.
But the Environmental Protection Agency last month scrapped several aspects of the state's air-pollution permitting program, including "flexible" permits that have allowed about 140 plants and refineries to exceed toxic emissions limits in the short term as long as they complied to overall federal averages in the long term.
Federal regulators say the move, set to take effect next year, is designed to cut toxic emissions and bring Texas in line with the Clean Air Act. And environmental groups say it will help improve the state's ecology and the health of Texans and those living nearby.
Industry groups, however, warn that getting rid of the state program in favor of more rigid standards will hurt industries crucial to the Texas economy, and that the costs of compliance may hit consumers.
"If there is a cost associated with it, it is very likely that it could cost the consumer more," said Debbie Hastings, vice president for environmental affairs for the Texas Oil And Gas Association, whose members provide about 25 percent of the nation's gasoline supply and include industry giants including Exxon Mobil Corp. and ConocoPhillips.
It's too early to know precisely how the rules will change or how much it will cost, but there's worry in the heavy industries that billow tons of toxins but employ thousands of people and pay billions in state and local taxes. Texas has more oil refineries and chemical plants than any other state, and the permit ruling comes as Gov. Rick Perry and industry officials are railing against a climate bill pending in Congress.
Plants could be forced to spend millions of dollars to upgrade pollution control equipment. Industry groups say that in turn could jack up the prices of gas, tires, carpet, upholstery and other products that pass through Texas factories.
"The prices have to keep up with the cost of doing business," said Mike Meroney, a spokesman for Texas Chemical Council, which represents about 80 companies with 200 sites that produce the state's leading export. "Every site's different — it could be very, very costly."
States are required to enforce the Clean Air Act, but they're given some flexibility in how to do it. The EPA approved Texas' major clean-air permitting plan in 1992, and the state has since submitted more than 30 regulatory changes.
The EPA issued its ruling last month as a result of a lawsuit settlement that forced the agency to approve or disapprove aspects of the Texas permitting process, agency spokesman Dave Bary said. The EPA said no other state offered polluters such flexibility, and cited problems with the permit program's enforcement, monitoring and record keeping, among other reasons.
The EPA held its first meeting last week with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which issues the permits, to work on getting the program into compliance. The commission's executive director, Mark Vickery, said the state permit rules have helped cut down on pollution and said the agency would work with the EPA to resolve the problems. The agencies are working through a 60-day comment period before the rules become final next year.
Fadel Gheit, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. in New York, said the permitting problem is just one more bit of bad news for industries that are already struggling. Several major oil companies are coming off second-quarter profit declines of more than 50 percent, although the oil industry posted record gains in 2008.
"It's bad, but how bad is the question?" Gheit said. "The outlook couldn't be more grim, and yet the government finds a way to kick them when they're down."
Bary, the EPA spokesman, said there's no way to know exactly how much cleaner the air would have been under federally approved permits.
But Neil Carman, an air specialist with the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club who spent years as an industrial plant inspector with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said he's certain ending the program will cut emissions. He said it will prove costly to the companies, but not as costly as treating long-term health problems caused by toxic emissions.
Al Armendariz, a chemical engineering professor at Southern Methodist University who is an expert on air pollution and an environmental advocate, said smaller and older facilities could face hefty costs, but major companies won't feel a thing.
"They'll say, 'Look, if we have to spend half a million dollars to re-permit, big deal.' They probably spend more than that on toiletries for those facilities," he said, noting that even multimillion-dollar expenses would be a "one-time capital blip" for major companies. Armendariz also said he doubts industry claims that consumers could feel any pain.
The oil and gas industry provides about 190,000 Texas jobs and paid about $10 billion in state and local taxes and royalties last year, according to the oil and gas association, which represents almost every producer and refiner in the state. The chemical industry employs about 74,000 Texans and last year paid $1 billion in state and local taxes.
The chemical industry is the top air polluter in the state, producing about 16,000 tons of toxic emissions, according to the most recent EPA toxic release inventory in 2007. Oil ranked third, behind power plants, with about 4,500 tons.
Both groups and state regulators say flexible permits have helped, and point to reductions of cancer-causing chemical benzene and ground-level ozone levels in the Houston area that's home to the bulk of the state's oil refineries and chemical plants.
But Carman said it's silly to be content with the progress because Texas is still so polluted.
"That's like somebody going before a judge and saying, 'Your Honor, I know I've had a DWI problem, but I brought it down from 50 DWI's a year ago to 30 now,'" said Carman, who like other environmentalists has long derided the permitting process as a rubber stamp in an industry-friendly state. "That's just not enough, especially when you're talking about things that cause cancer."
But the Environmental Protection Agency last month scrapped several aspects of the state's air-pollution permitting program, including "flexible" permits that have allowed about 140 plants and refineries to exceed toxic emissions limits in the short term as long as they complied to overall federal averages in the long term.
Federal regulators say the move, set to take effect next year, is designed to cut toxic emissions and bring Texas in line with the Clean Air Act. And environmental groups say it will help improve the state's ecology and the health of Texans and those living nearby.
Industry groups, however, warn that getting rid of the state program in favor of more rigid standards will hurt industries crucial to the Texas economy, and that the costs of compliance may hit consumers.
"If there is a cost associated with it, it is very likely that it could cost the consumer more," said Debbie Hastings, vice president for environmental affairs for the Texas Oil And Gas Association, whose members provide about 25 percent of the nation's gasoline supply and include industry giants including Exxon Mobil Corp. and ConocoPhillips.
It's too early to know precisely how the rules will change or how much it will cost, but there's worry in the heavy industries that billow tons of toxins but employ thousands of people and pay billions in state and local taxes. Texas has more oil refineries and chemical plants than any other state, and the permit ruling comes as Gov. Rick Perry and industry officials are railing against a climate bill pending in Congress.
Plants could be forced to spend millions of dollars to upgrade pollution control equipment. Industry groups say that in turn could jack up the prices of gas, tires, carpet, upholstery and other products that pass through Texas factories.
"The prices have to keep up with the cost of doing business," said Mike Meroney, a spokesman for Texas Chemical Council, which represents about 80 companies with 200 sites that produce the state's leading export. "Every site's different — it could be very, very costly."
States are required to enforce the Clean Air Act, but they're given some flexibility in how to do it. The EPA approved Texas' major clean-air permitting plan in 1992, and the state has since submitted more than 30 regulatory changes.
The EPA issued its ruling last month as a result of a lawsuit settlement that forced the agency to approve or disapprove aspects of the Texas permitting process, agency spokesman Dave Bary said. The EPA said no other state offered polluters such flexibility, and cited problems with the permit program's enforcement, monitoring and record keeping, among other reasons.
The EPA held its first meeting last week with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which issues the permits, to work on getting the program into compliance. The commission's executive director, Mark Vickery, said the state permit rules have helped cut down on pollution and said the agency would work with the EPA to resolve the problems. The agencies are working through a 60-day comment period before the rules become final next year.
Fadel Gheit, an analyst with Oppenheimer & Co. in New York, said the permitting problem is just one more bit of bad news for industries that are already struggling. Several major oil companies are coming off second-quarter profit declines of more than 50 percent, although the oil industry posted record gains in 2008.
"It's bad, but how bad is the question?" Gheit said. "The outlook couldn't be more grim, and yet the government finds a way to kick them when they're down."
Bary, the EPA spokesman, said there's no way to know exactly how much cleaner the air would have been under federally approved permits.
But Neil Carman, an air specialist with the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club who spent years as an industrial plant inspector with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said he's certain ending the program will cut emissions. He said it will prove costly to the companies, but not as costly as treating long-term health problems caused by toxic emissions.
Al Armendariz, a chemical engineering professor at Southern Methodist University who is an expert on air pollution and an environmental advocate, said smaller and older facilities could face hefty costs, but major companies won't feel a thing.
"They'll say, 'Look, if we have to spend half a million dollars to re-permit, big deal.' They probably spend more than that on toiletries for those facilities," he said, noting that even multimillion-dollar expenses would be a "one-time capital blip" for major companies. Armendariz also said he doubts industry claims that consumers could feel any pain.
The oil and gas industry provides about 190,000 Texas jobs and paid about $10 billion in state and local taxes and royalties last year, according to the oil and gas association, which represents almost every producer and refiner in the state. The chemical industry employs about 74,000 Texans and last year paid $1 billion in state and local taxes.
The chemical industry is the top air polluter in the state, producing about 16,000 tons of toxic emissions, according to the most recent EPA toxic release inventory in 2007. Oil ranked third, behind power plants, with about 4,500 tons.
Both groups and state regulators say flexible permits have helped, and point to reductions of cancer-causing chemical benzene and ground-level ozone levels in the Houston area that's home to the bulk of the state's oil refineries and chemical plants.
But Carman said it's silly to be content with the progress because Texas is still so polluted.
"That's like somebody going before a judge and saying, 'Your Honor, I know I've had a DWI problem, but I brought it down from 50 DWI's a year ago to 30 now,'" said Carman, who like other environmentalists has long derided the permitting process as a rubber stamp in an industry-friendly state. "That's just not enough, especially when you're talking about things that cause cancer."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)