Category Archives: Air pollution

Benicia Community Air Monitoring – Meeting Moved to March 3

City of Benicia Announcement, February 22, 2022
[Editor: See also: Save these dates for important meetings on Air District charges against Valero for continued air pollution violations – R.S.]

Air Monitoring Meeting Moved to March 3

The Benicia Community Air Monitoring Program meeting mentioned in the 02/14/22 edition of City of Benicia This Week has been moved to Thursday, March 3 at 7 p.m.  Original details below…

Air Monitor Now Operational

Following recent news of Stipulated Order between Bay Area Air Quality Management District and Valero Benicia Refinery, the City Manager shares the following information:

The Benicia Community Air Monitoring Program (BCAMP*) air monitoring station is now operational.

Real-time air quality data can be accessed at this website: http://beniciacommunityairmonitoringprogram.org/.

The website provides real time and historical air quality data for the following pollutants: particulate matter, black carbon, sulfur dioxide, ozone, benzene, toluene, and xylene. A new hydrogen sulfide monitor will soon be added. The website also provides additional information including:

    • A map showing the location of the monitoring station relative to potential sources and current wind speed and direction.
    • A tab for “How to Report a Problem” with important links and phone numbers
    • A “Resource” tab that provides some background about BCAMP and Argos Scientific. Argos is the main contractor for BCAMP that provides the technical support for the instruments and data transfer to the website. This page also has links to relevant community organizations as well as local elected officials and regulators.
Learn more at BCAMP’s Unveiling Webinar:
February 24 Thursday, March 3, 7 p.m.
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_IThYBb9JTRuj-ChO79TAxA
*BCAMP is a non-profit established for the benefit of the community to monitor ambient air quality in Benicia. BCAMP’s mission is to sample and measure local air in real time; report and archive raw data on the website; and provide education on health risks as related to air quality.

Save these dates for important meetings on Air District charges against Valero for continued air pollution violations

Email from Progressive Democrats of Benicia, February 21, 2022


The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) will have two important informational meetings to discuss the serious emissions violations incurred by the Valero Refinery.  BAAQMD sets and enforces air pollution regulations in the Bay Area. Valero’s violations included dangerous benzene emissions.

The first meeting is THIS THURSDAY, FEB 24, FROM 6 TO 8 PM

In the words of Jack Broadbent, executive officer of the Air District:

Valero’s disregard for air quality regulations and public safety in the surrounding community warrants decisive action and significant penalties to deter violations in the future. Valero did not report or control the emissions from this source as required by Air District regulations, state and federal law.

Please plan to attend the following Zoom meetings to get answers to your questions, find out more details about what has been released into our air, and learn how it could have affected the air quality in Benicia. What will be the consequences to the refinery for their negligent action? Show Valero and the Air District that we care and are prepared to take action to protect our community!!

At our last general membership meeting we announced a webinar for Benicia Community Air Monitoring System on the 24th. That has now been moved to March 3rd so you can attend these BAAQMD meetings, which we feel are vital for every member and supporter to join if they can, so we can make our voices heard on the matter of these violations, and demand Valero take important steps to regain the trust of our community. Please plan to attend!


 This Thursday, February 24, 6 to 8 pm
Air District staff are holding this meeting and will be present to discuss these violations in detail. Click on the link for more information: https://www.baaqmd.gov/news-and-events/workshops
 Join Zoom Meeting:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83974557503?pwd=Z2hDdTNxNitYV0h4cHgxOHR1eGtPUT09
Meeting ID: 839 7455 7503
Passcode: 808102
One tap mobile
+16699006833


Tuesday, March 1, 6 pm
Benicia City Council will address the Valero emission violations at their regular meeting. City council members have requested a briefing on the Valero case from Air District enforcement staff. This meeting is also open to the public. Please go to this page on the City of Benicia’s website for information on how to join.


Tuesday, March 15, 9:30 am
The second BAAQMD meeting is a legal hearing, where the Air District’s Hearing Board will consider approving the proposed abatement order. The public can view the agenda and provide written comment to the Hearing Board at the following link:
Hearing Board Agendas, Reports, and Orders (baaqmd.gov)
The public can also provide verbal comments to the Hearing Board during the hearing in the following ways:
 Join Zoom webinar:
https://bayareametro.zoom.us/j/88980571855
Webinar ID: 889 8057 1855
. . . or dial in remotely via phone at (669) 900-6833 or (408) 638-0968


 Please plan to attend one or all of these meetings, and thank you for supporting the health and safety of our community by taking action with us. Together, we will show Valero that no amount of cash they pump into our local elections will protect them from facing consequences for these very serious violations.

Kathy Kerridge, Int. Chair, Progressive Democrats of Benicia

See you there!

Kathy Kerridge
Interim Chair

 

Cracking Down on Refinery Emissions – all about “cat crackers”

[See also: Baykeeper notice of intent to sue Amports; Video and photos at Port of Benicia show fossil fuel polluter in the act;  Marilyn Bardet – Petcoke pollution in Benicia, photos going back to 1995]

A “cat cracker” may sound like a child’s snack, but…

Shell refinery in Martinez. Wikimedia Commons
Bay Area Monitor, League of Women Voters Bay Area, by Leslie Stewart, June-July 2021

A “cat cracker” may sound like a child’s snack, but call it by its full name — fluidized catalytic cracking unit — and it is obviously something far different. Cat crackers are a central piece of refinery equipment that turns crude oil into gasoline, diesel and aviation fuel. Regulating this specialized equipment, referred to by the acronym FCCU, recently resulted in unusually high public participation in a significant Bay Area Air Quality Management District decision.

Reducing pollution is challenging for refineries. Crude oil is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons, which is why it can be split into other products. In addition, it usually contains varying amounts of sulfur, nitrogen, oxygen and various metals, so refining it generates toxic compounds and particles which must be controlled. Refineries are subject to a multitude of regulations to prevent pollution reaching the environment and affecting the community.

FCCUs are responsible for over 50 percent of the particulate matter from refineries — over 800 tons per year — and 17% of particles 10 microns or less in diameter (PM10) from facilities with Air District permits in the region. The Air District’s Rule 6-5, regulating FCCUs in the Bay Area, was first adopted in 2015, because improved federal testing methods showed “scrubbed” FCCU emissions combining with the atmosphere when released to form more particulates than previously thought.  Particulate matter often doesn’t travel far and therefore has its greatest impact on adjacent, disadvantaged communities. Janet Hashe from Atchison Village near the Chevron refinery told the Air District Board in June, “The effects of air pollution are disproportionate on these communities and have been for decades. . .”

Under a recent state law, the Air District must require the Best Available Retrofit Control Technology for pollution sources at facilities that impact disadvantaged communities.  Rule 6-5 was revised in July in accordance with this law.  It will affect up to three of the region’s five refineries: Chevron, PBF (formerly Shell) and the currently inactive Marathon. Phillips 66 doesn’t use an FCCU at its Bay Area facility, and Valero recently installed a wet gas scrubber which should enable it to comply with the updated regulation.

Rule 6-5 now requires refineries to meet more stringent standards for emissions of sulfur dioxide and ammonia. It also sets a new limit on PM10 to reduce these emissions by over 400 tons/year. An agency staff report advised the Board that to reach that standard, local refineries will probably need to use wet gas scrubbers. This technology is used in other refineries across the country in addition to Valero.

The extensive debate over the draft rule, which started in 2019, also considered a more lenient standard that would allow twice as much PM10. Refineries might be able to meet that lower standard with less expensive electrostatic precipitators. During the multiple workshops and detailed discussion by the agency’s staff and Board subcommittees prior to two lengthy Board hearings, the two alternatives were nicknamed .10 and .20, based on the technical definition of how the PM10 output is measured, with .10 being the most stringent. They were also referred to as the ESP (electrostatic precipitator) and WGS (wet gas scrubber) alternatives.

Refinery in Martinez. Wikimedia Commons.

The more lenient .20 standard was potentially easier to achieve, and would have gone into effect by January 2023, while the adopted .10 standard won’t go into effect until January 2026. Although it will take longer to affect the region’s environmental quality, the long-term impact will be greater. Staff estimates show a yearly health benefit in reduced deaths, respiratory disease and cardiac illness of approximately $26-60 million, while the rejected alternative would have achieved only $17-38 million.

Long-term health benefits were the deciding factor for the district’s Stationary Source and Climate Impacts Committee when it voted to send the .10 alternative to the board as the recommended update to the rule. Health effects were also cited by a majority of the organizations and individuals who supported the more stringent alternative during board hearings. As Sally Tobin from Richmond noted at the six-hour June hearing, “Richmond children are hospitalized for asthma twice as often those in other parts of Contra Costa.” The Sierra Club’s Jacob Klein echoed this, saying, “We are learning more and more about the toxic impacts of particulate matter and the environmental racism associated with these emissions.”

However, the .20 limit also had substantial support. A consultant’s report on socioeconomic impacts, prepared as part of the agency’s staff report, concluded that the costs of the .10 limit might result in either employee cutbacks or an increase in gasoline prices, or both. Closures were seen as unlikely, and some public comments suggested that market factors would be the determinant in any decision to shutter a facility. However, refinery workers and their unions agreed with refinery concerns about impacts. Chad Fugate, a third-generation steamfitter, wrote, “We need these refineries to stay open and not run out of town”, while David Akeson was worried that refinery staffing decisions would affect safety, writing, “The recent Chevron fire is still fresh in my mind which was the result of repeat deferral on maintenance due to cost saving.”

District board members were also quite concerned about additional water that would be used in wet gas scrubbers, although reclaimed water and better technology could reduce that impact. Ultimately, they determined that the refinery costs and water usage were substantial unmitigated impacts that were necessary to achieve the benefits of the revised regulation.

Not surprisingly, considering the objections, the Air District has been sued by the two active refineries which will need to upgrade, PBF and Chevron. PBF is already implementing different particulate reduction measures, and maintains that it can’t afford to comply so will shut down. Chevron contests the Air District’s cost-benefit calculations. Both are asking that the rule be set aside; a decision will take several years. Nevertheless, Valero’s improved technology and the switch to refining renewable fuels at Phillips 66, and potentially at Marathon, may indicate the ultimate direction for Bay Area refineries.

Shell hit with $433,000 penalty for emission violations at Martinez refinery

Company cited for 44 infractions between 2017 and 2019

The Shell refinery is seen from Pacheco Boulevard in Martinez, Calif., on Friday, Aug. 10, 2012. (Jane Tyska/Bay Area News Group Archives)

Mercury News, by Shomik Mukherjee, October 15, 2021

MARTINEZ — Shell Oil has agreed to pay air quality regulators a $433,000 penalty for dozens of environmental violations at the oil refinery it once operated.

The refinery amassed 44 violations between 2017 and 2019, largely for emitting excessive amounts of pollutants that studies have shown to cause long-term health problems.

PBF Energy acquired the refinery from Shell in 2019 for $1 billion.

It’s the second settlement reached in a month involving environmental violations at one of Martinez’s two oil refineries. Marathon Petroleum agreed last month to pay $2 million to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District over violations at its now idled Martinez oil refinery, previously operated by oil company Tesoro.

Earlier this year, the air quality district voted to require refineries to dramatically reduce air pollution by upgrading their technology.

The latest settlement will pay for future inspections and enforcement of environmental regulations, the air quality district said.

“Ensuring that we all have clean air to breathe is the Air District’s top priority,” Jack Broadbent, the district’s executive officer, said in a written a statement. “This settlement is one way we hold Shell Oil accountable for its violations of air quality regulations and continue to safeguard clean air for all Bay Area residents.”

Joanne Fanucchi of Pittsburg, is photographed holding a Peoples’ Climate March sign with the Shell refinery in the background in Martinez, Calif., on Friday, April 21, 2017. (Doug Duran/Bay Area News Group) 

The refinery’s former management was found to have improperly monitored the facility’s flare pilots, which burn gas at low amounts to keep the flare system running correctly.

Once the pilots were extinguished, the refinery began emitting excess amounts of harmful pollutants, including hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide, according to the air quality district.

The refinery was also flagged for not correctly sealing its storage tanks, as well as for failing to report violations and keep records up to date.

All the infractions have since been corrected, the air quality district said. An analysis earlier this year by district staff estimated that PBF’s emissions were responsible for six premature deaths each year.

Although East Bay oil refineries historically have employed a lot of people, recent brushes with environmental regulations have thrown their future into question.

PBF Energy, which acquired the Martinez refinery from Shell, warned earlier this year that the costs of cutting emissions by 70% — as required by the air quality district — will force it to shut down the refinery. Chevron, which owns a refinery in Richmond, also pushed back against the mandate.

Meanwhile, the Marathon-owned Golden Eagle Refinery in Martinez is no longer in operation. According to Marathon, the refinery is being transitioned into a facility that will produce fuels that emit less carbon than petroleum diesel.