Who Do You Trust?

Jul 23, 2007 Environmental News, Sponsored Posts

I saw an opportunity today to post today about a controversy over by Lake Michigan. Seeing the debate, I thought it important to bring up here. According to the Chicago Tribune, BP has been given a break and are being allowed to dump more waste into the lake. But BP feels that this articles is unfairly slanted. They point to another article by the News-Sentinel as a more fair representation of the facts.

And here are the facts as BP tells them. Let’s take a look at how each of the articles treat a few of the statements from BP.

Only treated water into Lake Michigan
What is released from our refinery is treated water that is more than 99.9% water - not sludge. All sludge is treated separately, according to state and federal requirements, and never discharged into Lake Michigan.

The Chicago Tribune article does indeed make mention of sludge. They say that 4,925 pounds of sludge will be dumped into the lake daily. So does the News-Sentinel article. Sludge is not defined by either, and certainly it’s a word that evokes an ugly picture. BP clearly disputes that what they are discharging is sludge.

What makes the final difference to me is what that final 0.1% is composed of. That’s just under 5 pounds a day of whatever they aren’t managing to get out of the water before they dump it. The Chicago Tribune notes that the sludge would be primarily heavy metals, which are very hard on the environment. If we assume that this is true for the treated water released, this is not the best thing for the environment. I can grant that 5 pounds a day is not that much, compared to what could be released, but can I really be pleased about more heavy metals being released?

Well within legal limits
A new water discharge permit allows the refinery’s average ammonia discharge to increase, but at levels that will still be less than half of those that federal environmental guidelines could allow.

Both articles state that BP will be releasing 54% more ammonia, in addition to the 35% more sludge. While this is certainly disappointing, I feel this is best considered in conjunction with another statement by BP:

Continuous improvement
For the benefit of the environment, the Whiting Refinery voluntarily reduced total suspended solids in its water discharge by 40% in just the past four years.

I have to admit that this is an excellent degree of improvement, but that they’ve wiped it out with these new changes is frankly infuriating.

It is also important to note that BP is still within federal guidelines, although they have been given something of a break from Indiana regulations.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about the whole deal. As I see things we are in a bit of a bind when it comes to oil. Ideally I would love for this country to be less dependent on oil, but the simple fact is that we do depend on it right now. Getting the crude oil from Canada at least means the crude has traveled less of a distance and is from a more stable region. Refinery capacity is getting to be an issue, as no one wants to allow them to be built, due to the environmental damage they cause.

What do you think? Given the resources I’ve cited, or ones you know of, is this a good thing overall or a bad one?