Category Archives: Rodeo, CA

Tar Sands Free SF Bay – Town Hall meeting Thurs Mar 7 2019, Rodeo Hills Elementary

Repost from Sunflower Alliance

Tar Sands Free SF Bay – Town Hall meeting Thurs Mar 7 2019, Rodeo Hills Elementary

Feb 27, 2019

Tar Sands Free SF Bay – Town Hall meeting Thurs Mar 7 2019, 6-8:30pm, Rodeo Hills Elementary – CLICK FOR FULL SIZE DOWNLOADABLE POSTER

This coming Thursday, refinery corridor residents and allies are presenting a community forum on Phillips 66’s very dangerous plans to expand tar sands refining at its Rodeo facility.

Increased use of tar sands in the P66 crude slate means vastly increased tanker traffic in the Bay, an increased risk of spills, and increased assaults on community health and our worsening climate.  This town hall is an opportunity to learn about the two linked P66 proposals—the first Environmental Impact Report drops soon—and what we can do to stop them.

Please come out to listen, learn, and offer support to impacted community residents.

Food and beverage provided!

Speakers:

  • Andres Soto, Communities for a Better Environment
  • Pennie Opal Plant [and or Alison Ehara Brown], Idle No More SF Bay
  • LaDonna Williams, All Positives Possible and Fresh Air Vallejo
  • Janice Kirsch, MD, 350 Bay Area
  • Janet Pygeorge, President, Rodeo Citizens Association
  • Greg Karris, Senior Scientist, Communities for a Better Environment

When:

Thursday, March 7th, 6:00 – 8:30 PM

Where:

Rodeo Hills Elementary School
All Purpose Room
545 Garretson Street, Rodeo, CA 94572

Sponsored by:

Rodeo Citizens Association, Crockett-Rodeo United to Defend the Environment, Fresh Air Vallejo, Sunflower Alliance, 350 Bay Area, Idle No More SF Bay, Communities for a Better Environment, and Stand.earth.

Watch Online:

Visit facebook.com/standearth at 6:00 PM PST on Thursday, March 7th.

RSVP:

action@sunflower-alliance.org

    Please attend the Bay Area Air District meeting this Monday, April 9

    Repost from Sunflower Alliance

    No Tar Sands in the Bay!  …April 9 meeting of the BAAQMD

    Come show your opposition to the expansion of the Phillips 66 Rodeo refinery!

    The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) is considering Phillips 66’s application for a permit to more than double the number of tankers coming into their marine terminal. 

    WHEN
    Monday, April 9, 8:30 AM to 12 PM

    WHERE
    BAAQMD headquarters
    375 Beale St.,
    San Francisco

    RSVP

    Since Phillips 66 owns a big tar-sands mining operation in Alberta, we can assume the tankers will be bringing tar sands oil.

    First Nations in Canada have been battling the planned tripling of the pipeline that brings tar sands oil from Alberta through their lands to the West Coast, where it can be shipped to refineries in California.

    Phillips 66 has denied that expanding the wharf will mean increasing production at the refinery.   However, bringing in the additional amount of oil enabled by the wharf expansion plus the amount currently carried by the pipeline from the P66 sister refinery in Santa Maria equals a 15% increase in capacity.

    Expanding production would mean emitting more greenhouse gases and health-harming pollution into neighboring communities.  In addition, increasing the amount of oil coming through the Bay in tankers will increase the risk of  oil spills, like the one at Phillips 66 last September, which sent a plume of toxic air to Vallejo.  But it’s worse — because tar sands crude oil is so heavy and thick it can’t be cleaned up once it’s spilled.  It would just sink to the bottom of the Bay and stay there, contaminating the water, plants, and wildlife.

    Now BAAQMD has created an “ad hoc committee” on refineries, which plans to discuss these issues at its next meeting.  Come tell BAAQMD: No tar sands in the Bay!  No new fossil fuel projects!  No Phillips 66 expansion!  And stand with First Nations people in Canada fighting for their land.

    WHEN

    Monday, April 9, 8:30 AM to 12 PM

    WHERE

    BAAQMD headquarters
    375 Beale St.,
    San Francisco

    RSVP

    Hosted by Idle No More SF Bay and Indigenous Women of the Americas Defending Mother Earth Treaty

      Andrés Soto Letter: Benicians Deserve Better

      Repost from the Benicia Herald, Forum Page

      Benicia deserves better

      Andrés Soto

      February 21, 2018, By Andrés Soto

      Benicia is the only Bay Area refinery town that does not have the community protection of an Industrial Safety Ordinance, or ISO.

      In 1999, the city of Richmond and Contra Costa County adopted their interlocking ISOs. The Richmond ordinance mirrors the Contra Costa ISO, and Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Division is responsible for enforcement and reporting.

      Their experience with repeated refinery and associated hydrogen plant polluting events caused the elected leaders to respond to pressure from the disproportionally impacted communities in Richmond, Rodeo and Martinez for greater protection and information about polluting incidents.

      How did Benicia miss out?

      Since the adoption of the ISO, there have continued to be dangerous and deadly incidents at these Bay Area refineries, albeit at reduced rates, due to the ISO. Fortunately, the Richmond/Contra Costa ISO allows for corrective provisions that have improved refinery function and provided impacted communities with timely investigative information.

      Under the ISOs, a 72-hour post incident report is available to the public. Monthly reports, or more frequently if necessary, follow that report and are publicly posted. To date, neither the Benicia City Council nor the people of Benicia have received any official reports on the nearly monthlong Valero flaring disaster this past May.

      Based on the success of the Richmond/Contra Costa ISO, the California legislature adopted some of the process safety management portions of the ISO and made them state law, going into effect in October.

      Unfortunately, the legislature did not adopt all elements of the ISOs. Benicia’s ability to receive information, publish the results of investigations to the public and to require Valero to take corrective action simply does not exist. Can we wait for the legislature to strengthen the state law?

      While Valero and PG&E point the finger at each other over who is at fault for the Valero flaring disaster in May, Benicia remains in the dark. We know Valero was given permits to construct an adequate backup generator system but only one co-generator was built and the permit for the other was allowed to expire after several extensions, probably because of Valero’s bureaucrats in Texas.

      Do we Benicians think we can count on Texas oil men to put our health and safety ahead of their profits? The lesson we learned from the successful battle to stop Valero’s dangerous Crude-By-Rail Project is the company seems to stop at nothing to ensure their profits – even at the expense of Benicians.

      Benicia deserves better!

      Andrés Soto,
      Benicia