BP refinery threatens Great Lakes ecosystem

Industry in Northwest Indiana, photo courtesy LHOON

While British Petroleum (BP) is in the news for the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico — quickly becoming the worst environmental disaster in the nation’s history — environmental groups and lawmakers are arguing that the company’s environmental practices pose a similar threat to the Great Lakes.

BP’s Whiting oil refinery, on the southeastern shore of Lake Michigan in Indiana, is the nation’s fourth largest refinery and is in the process of a $3.8 billion dollar expansion project aimed at boosting its capacity to process oil from the Canadian tar sands.

The mega-refinery is the 6th largest source of industrial pollution in the Chicago area, according to an analysis by the Chicago Tribune, and its expanded operations are expected to increase greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent — the equivalent of adding 320,000 cars to area roads.

The BP facility already has a history of environmental violations.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency the refinery has violated air pollution rules since 2005 by modifying the plant in ways that have increased its toxic emissions without needed permits or pollution controls.

The plant’s un-permitted modifications have resulted in a significant increase in nitrogen oxides (NO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide(C0), and particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM10) emissions at a major pollution source in an area that already has very poor air quality, EPA said.

The agency warned that these emissions contribute to acid rain, increase smog levels and contribute to cardiovascular disease, lung damage, and premature deaths.

In May 2009 EPA cited the company for excessive benzene releases going back six years. According to EPA BP released 16 times the allowable limit of benzene in 2008.

“Benzene is a known human carcinogen, shown to cause leukemia,“ the agency wrote. “Ecological effects include death in exposed animal, bird and fish populations and death or reduced growth rate in plant life.”

In February 2010 EPA added another violation, notifying the company that its flares were burning inefficiently in violation of air pollution control practices.

Despite the ongoing environmental violations at the refinery, in 2007 as part of the plant’s expansion project, the state of Indiana granted a permit to the company that would allow it to substantially increase its pollution of Lake Michigan, which is the drinking water supply for neighboring Chicago and many other communities.

The permit granted BP permission to increase ammonia releases by 54 percent and heavy metal-containing silt by 35 percent, drawing widespread opposition.

In July 2007 the U.S. House and Senate approved a resolution, introduced by Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Chicago) and Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-Grand Rapids), asking EPA to block Indiana’s permit.

“The benefits of this project should not come at the expense of our most precious natural resource,” Ehlers said. “The Great Lakes are the world’s largest freshwater system and serve as a source of drinking water, food, jobs and recreation for more than 40 million Americans. It is critical that we enhance our restoration efforts for this vital resource. It is already polluted enough.”

Ehlers called the planned discharges by BP “totally inconsistent with the goals of Great Lakes restoration” and warned that ammonia and suspended solids promote algae blooms that can suffocate fish, destroy fish habitat, deprive plants of sun and oxygen and trigger beach closings.

“If they can afford to pipe crude oil from Canada thousands of miles through pipelines,” he said, “they certainly should be able to find a better solution for disposal.”

The next month BP publicly promised to abide by the terms of its earlier permit or cancel the expansion project.

Nearly three years later, though, and with the expansion project 47 percent completed according the company’s website, BP has not made any announcements about how it will achieve these reductions.

“[Back in 2007] BP made some very vocal and public promises that they would not put additional pollution into the lake,” Ann Alexander, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Midwest program said, “but there has just been deafening silence since then.”

BP has declined to get a permit amendment and make this commitment legally binding, Alexander said, and now the Gulf oil spill is deepening concerns about pollution control at BP’s Whiting refinery.

“I think the concern is that this is more of the same. Broken promises and failure to control pollution here would be unfortunate and sad but not surprising.”