Communities Against Carbon Transport and Injection – CACTI
On September 9, 2025, CACTI was launched. Montezuma LLC is proposing to inject carbon dioxide waste underground near the Montezuma Wetlands in Solano County. Known as the Montezuma Carbon Hub, the project would involve capturing CO2 from Bay Area refineries and power plants, transporting it via underwater pipeline or boat, and injecting it near a site of sensitive ecological restoration.
The pipeline network and injection site would be developed near Bay Area communities like Martinez, Benicia, Antioch, Richmond, and Collinsville. Carbon waste dumping projects like this one threaten the health and safety of local residents, especially because CO2 pipelines are dangerous and underregulated. Pipeline leaks can cause suffocation or even death to people and wildlife.
Contra Costa Hazardous Materials Program, issued April 1, 2024
The public has an opportunity to comment on the Incident Investigation/ Root Cause Analysis report (from a third-party consultant)associated with a spent catalyst release from the Martinez Refining Company (MRC) which occurred between November 24-25, 2022. The 45-day comment period is opening on April 4, 2024, and then closes on May 20, 2024. A public meeting will be held at the Contra Costa County Administration Building, Room 110A/B/C located at 1025 Escobar Street in Martinez on April 11, 2024, from 6:00PM to 8:00 PM.
To join via Zoom: https://zoom.us/j/98874840760
or Dial: (669) 900-6833 Webinar ID: 988 7484 0760
MRC had a particulate matter release from their Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit (CCU) on November 24-25, 2022. This release was estimated to have emitted 20-24 tons of fine particulate matter, called spent catalyst, into the surrounding community. TheCounty, working with an Oversight Committee, hired Scott Berger and Associates to perform the incident investigation. TheOversight Committee included members of the community, the City of Martinez, the City of Benicia, United Steel Workers, a refinery representative, and CCHHMP.
If you are interested and are available, attend the Public Meeting or submit comments on the report to Hazmat.Arpteam@cchealth.org or mail comments to the following address:
Contra Costa Health Hazardous Materials Programs
Attn: Michael Dossey
4585 Pacheco Blvd., Ste. 100
Martinez, CA 94553
More about Contra Costa’s search for accountability and transparency from refineries on BenIndy:
[Note from BenIndy: Valero’s Benicia Refinery is the 5th largest stationary greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter in California. As Sunflower Alliance founding member Shoshana Wechsler notes below, “[t]he thing that continues to strike me is that the Bay Area has no clue how important we are as a major fossil fuel hub. […] We need to understand that refining both petroleum and biofuels has a very negative effect on our public health and obviously contributes mightily to the climate crisis.” Let’s enter 2024 with clear eyes…and hope for clearer lungs come 2025.]
Valero’s Benicia Refinery, a principal contributor of greenhouse gas emissions in California, looms over residential neighborhoods. | Samantha Laurey / The Chronicle 2022.
SF Chronicle, by Kurtis Alexander, December 31, 2023
California’s largest greenhouse gas polluters, from power plants to oil refineries to chemical manufacturers, produced slightly fewer emissions last year than the previous year, federal data shows. But it’s still too much planet-warming gas to cut significantly into the problem of climate change, environmentalists say.
Three of the five biggest carbon emitters in the state were in the Bay Area, according to the Environmental Protection Agency’s 2022 data on large polluting facilities. All three were refineries in the East Bay, where the process of turning crude oil into gasoline, jet fuel and other high-demand petroleum products creates substantial greenhouse gas discharges — even before the fuels themselves are used in vehicles or planes.
The refineries were among 367 large stationary sites in California that collectively reported 93 million metric tons of carbon pollution last year, a decline of about 1% over 2021, according to the data. The facilities produce about a quarter of the state’s total human-generated greenhouse gases, which does not include wildfires. Cars and trucks remain the biggest source of carbon emissions.
“The thing that continues to strike me is that the Bay Area has no clue how important we are as a major fossil fuel hub,” said Shoshana Wechsler, a founding member of the Sunflower Alliance, an East Bay group that advocates for reducing refinery pollution. “We need to understand that refining both petroleum and biofuels has a very negative effect on our public health and obviously contributes mightily to the climate crisis.”
Worldwide discharges of greenhouse gases, notably carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, have contributed to warming the atmosphere about 2 degrees Fahrenheit in the post-industrial age. The heat, scientists say, has led to a host of problems, from an increase in drought and wildfire to rising seas and more extreme weather. The Earth’s 10 warmest years on record all were logged since 2010. This year is on track to be the hottest yet.
California regulators have established some of the most ambitious policies to restrict the release of greenhouse gases from large polluting facilities, including a cap-and-trade program that forces emitters to buy permits to pollute and requirements that electric utilities generate increasing amounts of clean energy.
Over the past decade, carbon emissions from the state’s big polluters have declined nearly 20%, according to the EPA data.
Many, though, say industry is still given too much leeway and stricter regulation is necessary given the climate challenge at hand. The state has a broad goal of reaching zero carbon emissions, on net, by 2045.
“Major polluters continue to pollute somewhat unabated,” said Nihal Shrinath, an associate attorney for the Sierra Club based in Oakland. “We really need to see much more aggressive emission reductions over the next 25 years.”
Shrinath said much of the decline in pollution from large facilities was due, not to regulation, but to unrelated factors, like Californians being more efficient with their energy use and needing less fossil fuels.
California’s top five greenhouse gas emitters were all oil refineries, according to the EPA data. Two were in Southern California in addition to the three in the East Bay: Chevron Richmond Refinery, Valero Benicia Refinery and Martinez Refining Company.
Ross Allen, a spokesperson for Chevron, described the company’s Richmond refinery as “absolutely essential to modern life in the Bay Area,” saying the facility supplied 60% of the fuel for Bay Area airports and about 20% of the gasoline used in Northern California. It also provides more than 3,000 jobs.
This is a screenshot of SF Chron’s interactive data table that shows greenhouse gas emissions from large industrial facilities in California, 2022. Click the image to be redirected to the webpage with the article and the table. Readers can use the table to search for and filter GHG emitters in this state. There may be a paywall.
“We are working to reduce carbon intensity of our operations, while continuing to provide an essential product,” he said.
The state’s refineries cumulatively emitted 22 million metric tons of carbon pollution in 2022, according to the EPA data. Refineries were the second-most-polluting type of facility, following power plants, which are far more numerous and emitted 35 million metric tons last year. The chemical industry, manufacturing hydrogen, nitrogen and other products, reported 10 million metric tons of emissions.
Also among California’s 25 biggest greenhouse gas polluters were two gas-fired power plants in Pittsburg and an oil refinery in Rodeo.
The EPA data on large polluting sites generally includes facilities discharging at least 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide and equivalent greenhouse gases a year, about what’s emitted by burning coal from 136 rail cars, according to the agency.
Since you’re here, learn more about Contra Costa’s search for accountability and transparency from refineries by clicking on any of the following links:
[Note from BenIndy: There’s been a whirlwind of activity around Contra Costa’s troubled refineries this week. After a surprise inspection, Contra Costa Health CEO Anna Roth issued an open letter putting Martinez Refining Company “on notice” for ongoing violations before listing a series of demands . (You should really read the letter. Go on. We’ll wait.) Check out the links below the article for more information. This is all fascinating, motivating stuff for residents interested in enacting an industrial safety ordinance in Benicia. Accountability and transparency should be easy between good neighbors.]
The Martinez Refining Co. is the focus of a joint civil action over its release of heavy-metal laden dust. | Scott Strazzante / The Chronicle.
The list of demands also included records of work stoppage orders and near-miss incidents.
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors chair John Gioia and vice chair Federal Glover met with management of Martinez Refining Company on Thursday to discuss county concerns over the company’s frequency of chemical releases and other incidents since Thanksgiving 2022 when the refinery sent 20 to 24 tons of chemicals into the surrounding community.
The supervisors also delivered an open letter to Daniel Ingram, the refinery manager, from Anna Roth, the chief executive officer of Contra Costa Health, documenting incidents and ordering refinery owner PBF Energy to provide CCH’s regulators with full access to the facility, documentation related to deferred maintenance of equipment, and access and data related to maintenance and safety practices.
CCH and the Bay Area Air Quality Mangement District began a surprise inspection of the refinery this week that could last days, or even weeks, a CCH official said.
The letter, dated Thursday, called the number of releases and other incidents “unacceptable” and said they’ve “compromised health and safety at your facility, and in our community.”
“In the past year, CCH has documented 21 releases or spills of hazardous materials at the Martinez refinery,” the letter said. “According to the County’s Community Warning System records, PBF also reported using flares — devices that should only be used as an emergency safety measure to prevent more serious incidents — at a rate of nearly once per week. CCH has documented 46 flaring incidents at the refinery since November 2022.”
Roth wrote PBF is responsible for “ensuring the reliability of its systems and establishing and maintaining a culture of safety at the refinery. The number of incidents at the refinery over the past year is unacceptable for a facility operating in Contra Costa County and points to an apparent fundamental lack of investment on the part of PBF in ensuring the reliability of its systems and maintaining a facility that is safe for its workers and the neighboring community.”
Roth also included a statement Tuesday from BAAQMD executive director Philip Fine saying the air district has joined forces with the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office on civil enforcement against the refinery.
“The recent air quality violations at MRC are troubling and unacceptable. The Air District shares the community’s concern and outrage about these events,” Fine said in the statement. “We are actively investigating and pursuing all legal avenues to ensure MRC is compliant with our regulations and that future violations and community disruptions are minimized.”
Roth wrote, “CCH will not tolerate unsafe business practices at the refinery” and officially notified PBF of CCH actions, including “Beginning immediately, PBF shall allow CCH employees and agents onsite at all times and permit them access to any part of the facility upon request.”
She also wrote that PBF will give CCH all documentation relating to deferred maintenance of equipment at MRC no later than 10 a.m. Jan. 2, for CCH to decide the facility’s work plan for addressing deferred maintenance moving forward.
CCH also wants a list of every employee and resident contractor working at MRC, including job titles and description of responsibilities, and wants the ability to interview them without PBF management present.
The list of demands also included records of work stoppage orders and near-miss incidents.
CCH also reserved the right to come inside the refinery “during any incident that has the potential to impact public health or the environment in accordance with all applicable laws.”
Roth wrote CCH “reserves the right to modify the Community Warning System level of any incident impacting public health without consulting PBF. All costs associated with incident response will be borne by PBF.”
The letter also said, “At least two weeks before PBF’s planned turnaround in early 2024, PBF shall provide to CCH a comprehensive plan outlining when planned flaring will occur during the turnaround and what steps the facility will take to minimize the amount of flaring.”
A turnaround is a scheduled event in which an entire process unit is taken offline for an extended period for work to be carried out.
During that time, CCH wants observers onsite at all times and access to any part of the facility.
Roth ended the letter by writing, “We look forward to collaborating with PBF on our mutual goal of making this facility the good neighbor it aspires to become.”
More about Contra Costa’s search for accountability and transparency from refineries:
You must be logged in to post a comment.