Indiana Allows BP To Pollute Lake Michigan 490
An anonymous reader writes "Indiana regulators exempted BP from state environmental laws to clear the way for a $3.8 billion expansion that will allow the company to refine heavier Canadian crude oil. They justified the move in part by noting the project will create 80 new jobs. The company will now be allowed to dump an average of 1,584 pounds of ammonia and 4,925 pounds of sludge into Lake Michigan every day."
Lake Michigan (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Lake Michigan (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes our drinking water comes from Lake Michigan and northwest Indiana is where all the oil and steel refineries who have been heavily polluting the lake beyond recovery for years. Chicago is very close and less than an hour a way. This will certainly wreck the fishing, tourism, and health for millions of people.
I was thinking of going on vacation to great dunes national park in Indiana next summer which has great beaches on the lake. Now I think I will pass as I doubt anything will be left alive over there or least I do not want to swim in it. This pisses me off and I hope Chicago goes without water for a few months as they try to find a different source of drinking water just to make enough people outraged at whats going on. Why is this legal?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Indiana, jealous of Chicagoland, Wisconsin and Michigan, has decided to mount an ecological attack on us!
If only it weren't considered ridiculous to think about it that way. We can't really call it an attack for two reasons:
This is just disgusting. But what's more disgusting is that it h
Aquafina is bottled useing that water as well. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Lake Michigan (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Being in Milwaukee, myself, I can relate. I only live a few blocks from the lake (about a mile south of the port) and when the wind blows just right, you definitely don't want to be outside for long.
I wouldn't even think of using Bradford Beach (which could be a really nice beach). The only time I've ever actually ventured into the Lake Michigan (aside from some parks up north) has been for polar bearing on New Year's. I just hope that the various diseases don't survive cold ;)
On a more related note... In
Is it worth it? (Score:5, Funny)
6500 lbs of waste each day.
The environment.
Priceless.
There are some things money can't buy...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Is it worth it? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is ridiculous. A $3.8 billion expansion and they can't afford to clean up the mess that they're creating?
At which point will the Indiana legislators start realising that their duty is to all the people of Indiana, not just the few that work for BP?
I bet if you asked people if they would want their laws bent or even waived to allow a polluter to pollute their water even more that 99 percent of them would say no. So how the hell does the Indiana Department of Environmental Management have the balls to try to justify and defend their decision?
What's next? Indiana cops giving drug dealers the green light to push crack in schools?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cleaning completely is not possible. There may be one or three people on the entire Slashdot, who know, what can and can not be done with this waste... The rest are just venting.
The article's numbers are weird. They assert, the amount of "industrial sludge" will increase by 35% (non-toxic ammonia by even more), but the refinery's output — by only 15%.
It would seem, they are better of allowing another refine
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
We all want "energy independence", but the sales of big SUVs are only growing.
The linked article is a load of crock. For instance:
The bigger the guzzler, the better the numbers. Sales of GMC's Yukon XL were up a whopping 72 percent last month, and the totals for its Chevrolet sister, the Suburban, rose 38 percent. Topping off the tank on either one can cost as much as $120.
They costs so much to fill up because they have a 31 gallon fuel tank [gmbuypower.com]. That has no direct relation on gas-guzzler status. Its
Re: (Score:3)
There is hope -- if the Republican candidates agreed with each other on anything during their most recent TV-debate, it was that we need to build (much) more nuclear stations. That should ease the strain considerably...
I'm sorry, maybe I'm a missing something, but could you explain how building more nuclear reactors will reduce oil consumption? Oil is used to generate less than 5% of the electricity in the U.S. I think one of us is a little confused....
And please don't think I'm against nuclear power - I'm a fan and believe it has the potential to be a lot cleaner than coal - but I'm getting tired of people incorrectly using oil independence as an argument for it's use.
An explanation... (Score:4, Insightful)
By powering electric cars and other PHEVs? Allowing the expansion of light rail? Allowing more homes to convert from fuel oil to electric heating? Providing the power needed to make hydrogen? Powering other conversion industries (ethanol, biodiesel, shale, etc.)
In short, you have to think about not just the power industry, but also about all of the things said industry could power...
"I think one of us is a little confused...."
Hope that helped end your confusion...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Is it worth it? (Score:4, Interesting)
Ammonia is a plant fertilizer - and nitrogen is expensive these days. It'll up the algae level unless some bright spak can find a way to sell it to farmers.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I'm a citizen of Indiana and I was furious when I read it in the paper this morning. A measly eighty jobs in exchange for further ruining of our lake front! It's unconscionable. Our free lake front swimming is one of our state treasures. Miles of sand, trails, and surf.
That said, I imagine there was a lot of pressure on the state legislatures at a federal level. They see it as a chance to decrease Middle Eastern dependence. The whole idea makes me furious.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, I imagine there was a lot of pressure on the state legislatures at a federal level. They see it as a chance to decrease Middle Eastern dependence. The whole idea makes me furious.
Then stop allowing the US oil companies to sell their oil anywhere but the US. They are making their moneys (if my memory serves me correctly) by selling a huge chunk of oil to Japan, etc.
Since they can charge all sorts of costs for transportation to the other countires that they can't charge here.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://www.economist.com/images/ga/2007w27/Petrol
Re:Is it worth it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't be silly. The current politicians aren't worried in the least about this issue. By the time cleanup becomes a concern for them, they'll all have different jobs.
Re:Is it worth it? (Score:5, Insightful)
If there was a big enough crack lobby, it would be sold in a vending machine next to the school cafeteria.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They dont have balls, thats why they let it happen in the first place. Corporate America has taken the testicles of the politicians and got them in a vice like grip.
Re:Is it worth it? (Score:5, Interesting)
The lake is over 1,000 cubic miles of water, so even if the water was stagnant it would take a long time to raise the PPM of the discharge to a harmful level, assuming good mixing (yes, yes, assumptions make an ass out of you and me, blah blah blah).
If the flow rate through the lake is several million gallons a day then this discharge could be diluted to the point of irrelevance, and it probably is.
Now you'd want to take into account other man made discharges into the lake, but these are the questions you ask to determine if this actually causes any harm. What I described is pretty much what the state and national EPA does for these sorts of things.
The fact is that human activity has an impact on the environment. Given that, the pragmatic question is how much can mother nature "take for the team." The answer? some, definately, without causing any harm.
It's an old maxim- the dose makes the poison. You can put bad stuff into something you want to preserve without causing harm.
Now I will admit I don't know enough about ocean and freshwater chemistry to know where to even start figuring out the ultimate disposition of the dumped products. I am guessing, however, that somebody who works for the EPA and is involved in the permiting process has a decent idea of how that all works.
The power plant I work at frequently discharges water with various chemical adultrents into the atlantic ocean at up to 100 gallons per minute. That discharge, however, is diluted by 420,000 gpm of straight sea water used for cooling, and then mixed in well below the surface a mile offshore.
What could you safely drink if it was diluted to 1 part per 4,200 parts? sulfuric acid? Antifreeze? Drano? All of the above?
(pardon the shitty writing, I'm tired & about to go to bed)
EPA works well? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well said, and I would like to think that the EPA works as well in this case as it seems to have done at your plant.
Maybe you're thinking of a different EPA because the one I know of said the air was good to breath in NYC after 911. The head of the EPA then, Christine Todd Whitman [amny.com] said it was safe to breath although toxins were in the air. And exactly how many of the Superfund [wikipedia.org] sites have been cleaned up?
Falcon
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Great (Score:5, Insightful)
It is very frustrating that the federal government refuses to do things to protect the Great Lakes. Heck, they even refuse to stop ships from wherever from coming in and dumping bilge water contaminated with all sorts of invasive species into the lakes. These resources must be protected.
Look at what invasive species such as the emerald ash borer have done to MI and other surrounding states. When we people learn?
-Andrew
Re:Great (Score:5, Funny)
About 5 minutes before it kills them?
I am glad I am not human.
invasive species in the Great Lakes (Score:4, Informative)
Heck, they even refuse to stop ships from wherever from coming in and dumping bilge water contaminated with all sorts of invasive species into the lakes.
You mean like the Zebra mussle [wikipedia.org]?
FalconIf it's good for the canadians (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Ironically this deal and others like it have gotten an enormous amount of bad press in Alberta - you'd think we'd be happy to export this crap, but the local media can only see the $$$ lost in not refining it ourselves.
Free trade and multinationals (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Free trade and multinationals (Score:4, Informative)
At some point you must open up(when it will cost too much), and if you wait for too long, your industry will be dangerously uncompetitive due to a long time lack of..yes, competition.
This has already happened to your steel and car industry. Probably others as well. Wasn't paper hit as well?
Wouldn't a better way be to legislate that all fuel(this may of course be applied to other goods) sold in the U.S. must have been produced using methods that meet certain environmental and humanitarian requirements? Like the ones in the U.S.?
This would level the field in a kind of fair way. Sort of. Don't you think?
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't a better way be to legislate that all fuel(this may of course be applied to other goods) sold in the U.S. must have been produced using methods that meet certain environmental and humanitarian requirements? Like the ones in the U.S.?
You make a great point here. What I was trying to say is that if the 3rd world countries aren't forced to raise their standards, than we are going to be forced to lower ours in order to compete, which is bad for our country and environment. It's a big problem that just keeps getting bigger and the only people that seem to be above it is the multinational corporations which are using their advantage to get what they want from whatever country that gives it to them.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a dream of course.
Re: (Score:2)
How do Japan and China work around this? They decided they don't care if anyone imports stuff to them at all and nobody can refuse to buy their stuff. The US, on the other hand, is prett dependent on keeping some kind of trade balance with EU and other countries.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You speak as if lowering one's standards to compete was the obvious choice. If third world countries want certain jobs bad enough that they are willing to poison their children with heavy metals and dioxins to get them then I say let them. If that is what it takes to keep those jobs in the United
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's just not true. One, you're equating regulated markets with protectionism (the latter being merely an extreme level of the former), and two, you certainly can keep those regulations in place forever. For that matter, you can refuse to trade with certain nations entirely, if such trade is detrimental to you. You've made the basic assumption that the global economy is good for everyone, and
Re:Free trade and multinationals (Score:4, Insightful)
They key isn't to close up the borders in some protectionist ostrich stunt, but to demand high standards at home and abroad.
But I guess very few people are interested on competing on a level playing field.
Re: (Score:2)
So we should just not trade with people with lower standards? That would be illegal now. Against the WTO practices. So it isn't likely to happen unless the rest of the world gets behind the idea.
Bullcrap (Score:5, Informative)
Claiming environmental legislation is being weakened in the name of free trade is just rubbish. I'd bet pretty heavy money that had BP been building this plant in Sweden, or even across the lake in Canada, that they would have been subject to tighter environmental restrictions.
Free trade generates jobs, its what made the USA the economy that it is. Economic protectionism is actually what is destroying the environment in the US, e.g. subsidising non-green corn for bio-fuel while punishing much cleaner Brazilian ethanol. Corporations always try and get away with things, governments should enforce things. Unfortunately in the US the environment is just an excuse for bad subsidies and anti-competitive behaviour rather than using the Free market to adopt solutions that are working elsewhere.
Blame NAFTA, Blame Japan, Blame China. In fact Blame Canada... anything rather than admit the problem is rather closer to home.
free trade (Score:3, Informative)
NAFTA and free trade in general is pretty damn stupid.
NAFTA IS NOT freetrade. Anyone who things they are the same is wrong. NAFTA is all about government interference in trade whereas free trade is little if any government interference in trade.
Illegal workers are mostly a problem caused by making it difficult for workers to work legally
While I agree with the sentiment I'd also add that there would not be as many Mexicans trying to get into the US if NAFTA weren't so bad. According to NAFTA, with
Lifetime hoosier here (Score:3, Insightful)
this doesn't surprise in teh least, he's also behind the attempts to mirror new york's city wide smoking bans on virtually everything (hint: we have a fuck of a lot of smokers here, probably more than average, no i'm not one of them however i'm surprised that in a republican state where republicans are supposedly for less gov't involvement in everything shit like this flies every time)
he's pro-roadblock checkpoints etc etc
life in naptown sucks, anyone whose not from here is always trying to go back home and most of hte (smart?) people from here leave or try to (they're always bitching about the "brain drain" here, they actually think this will be some tech mecca and have been trying to cement that position for awhile now, HELLO Chicago ain't that far, but they dont' care)
in addition to these they make no effort to keep the large manufacturing jobs open etc, and tout a handful of high level investment jobs as some massive coup that will save us all while thousands of people here get laid off who dont' have a degree and healthcare is virtually unavailable and gas prices continue to skyrocket well over national averages (which Daniel's shot down an investigation into, ps this is one of the only states in teh nation that had actual sanctions against gas stations post 9/11 because on that day some stations were selling gas at $5-7/gal for panic profit - while I'm sure GWB would approve some angry people somewhere did not.)
this country sucks worse every day and this city (indianapolis) and the state are focused, concentrated microcosm.
Re:Lifetime hoosier here (Score:5, Insightful)
Some people, like the people who made this deal, aren't "red staters" or "blue staters" they are bastards looking out not for the people or the country or anyone else but themselves. That is who they care about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lifetime hoosier here (Score:5, Insightful)
I dunno about that. In the city, I've never seen a rusting Chevy left to rot and leak oil in the yard for a decade. In the city, I've never seen people burning their own garbage out behind the shed, permits or not. In the city, I've never seen a barn that is just left to rot and collapse for a few winters, leaving a fire hazard that's filled with tetanus-risky nails and whatever else was in there.
I understand what you're saying, and the city definitely has its own issues that aren't ideal, but saying that the folks in the countryside are all pure and proactive about saving the environment is not realistic.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps true, but unfortunately the politicians these 'red-state people' tend to vote for are the absolute last people that would lift a finger to protect these things.
Re: (Score:2)
There are intelligent people here. They are just swarmed under.
Nothing new (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's an interesting little essay on "The Myth of the Rational Voter". WARNING!!!! Intelligence and open-mindedness required! http://www.cato-unbound.org/2006/11/06/bryan-capl
Re:Lifetime hoosier here (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you sure you pay attention to the politics of Indiana? We have one Republican and one Democratic senator, both of which lay pretty firmly in the 'moderate' sector. Our last Governor was Democrat, and some of our longest lasting Governors were also Democrats. Not to mention most state polls imply 'Our Man Mitch(R)' doesn't have a chance in hell of being re-elected as Governor.
Meanwhile, a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage fell apart in the state senate this April, getting far more opposition than a similar ban did in Ohio (a flip state). I almost threw a party in celebration. The big-bad,evil, money-loving corporations stepped up and said they'd lose employees if they couldn't give rights to life partners. Thank goodness for Eli Lilly.
Sure, I'll admit, we always vote Red on the Presidential Ballot, but thats just one aspect of our political topography, and it's certainly no reason to lump the politics and personality of our citizens into one giant red-neck cliche.
Why do you feel the need to disparage and condone the state you live in? Considering you've never lived anywhere else, are you certain that these 'red state' sensibilities that you consider synonymous with blind idiocy aren't really just a product of human nature and aren't prevalent in all parts of the world?
Anyway, since this is the internet, and we're suppose to be judgemental and insulting: Stop being a small-minded, angsty, prick, and try appreciating the world you live in for a change.
Oh and I'm an Indiana, registered-republican moderate, female, pro-choice, pro-death penalty, broke, agnostic, college graduate, I hate Nascar and country music, and I'm so angry I could spit over this BP scandal, I love that lake. I didn't vote for Mitch the first time and I won't be doing it next time either.
A little homework (Score:5, Funny)
If I may, I'd just like to make one suggestion. Let's offer a free Hummer to any of those 80 workers who would like to take their share of waste products home each day.
What we're forgetting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Are we supposed to assume BP's re-branding was a big PR stunt to make the public think they care about the environment? Phhs, No. If there is one thing I've learned, it's that energy company always have the best of intentions, even when they're shooting protesters from helicopter... shooting them with love.
There goes the beach vacation. (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact is that I don't think I want to boat, or have my kids play, in the water there.
Sure, maybe it'll only be so many thousand tons of crud in a bazillion gallons of water. But if anyone in my family ever came down with any disease in the next 40 years, I'd certainly feel a bit guilty.
Why Dump Ammonia? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Why Dump Ammonia? (Score:4, Insightful)
You make an excellent point however, turning it into a marketable product or at least partnering with someone who will would cost them a bit more than dumping, but make more sense from an environmental standpoint.
Despite BP marketing and rebranding as a "green" company this shows all they are interested in. I understand companies are in business to make money, but don't lie to us telling me you care about the environment and then slap us in the face like this.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ammonia is used as an industrial precursor. For instance it's used to make fertilizer. Why dump it in Lake Michigan rather than purifying and selling it?
TFA says:
State and federal regulators, though, agreed last month with the London-based company that there isn't enough room at the 1,400-acre site to upgrade the refinery's water treatment plant.
It's a pretty lame argument, but I guess that they don't have enough space to put an ammonia purification plant either.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
more than 80 Jobs (Score:5, Insightful)
In the long term, this will create more than 80 jobs by the time the lake becomes a giant superfund site (Hazmat jobs pay good money!). Of course, people may die from the pollution but that will only improve the jobless rate as well. Wildlife doesn't vote or contribute, so who cares if wildlife dies? C'mon, government only thinks of the long-term benefit for the people. Right?
Re: (Score:2)
undertakers ( et al ) and ministers. Land prices will go up as
cemeteries are built ( and don't forget those jobs either ).
Re: (Score:2)
Priest Vito Cornelius: I try to serve life. But you only... seem to want to destroy it.
Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg: Oh, Father, you're so wrong. Let me explain. [closes office door, places an empty glass on desk]
Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg: Life, which you so nobly serve, comes from destruction, disorder and chaos. Take this empty glass. Here it is, peaceful, serene and boring. But if it is... [pushes glass off table]
Jean-Baptiste Emanuel Zorg: des
Some mint needs to do commemorative "quarters" (Score:5, Funny)
Florida -- the Electoral Screwup State
Kansas -- the Science Miseducation State
Indiana -- the Environmental Rape State
Michigan is a sh*thole anyway (Score:2, Funny)
What about the other states? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
The Solution (Score:2)
This will go to court (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that the neighboring states will have something to say about this.
Sadly MI won't have much impact, you know...that state SURROUNDED by the lakes? Due to our inept and self-serving "leadership" of Jenny Granholm. The same Gov who also lied about wanting to protect the lakes and then wrote Nestle a free pass to yoink a ridiculous amount of water out of the lakes and divert it to wherever they want.
I don't know much about the gov of IN, but it sounds as if he/she is just as self-serving.
Doesn't Canada get any say? (Score:2)
How Much is The Environment Worth? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're lucky, that gets you maybe ten new police officers. And something tells me it's going to cost more than $615K to clean up the crap being spilled in lake each year. Hell, the legal fees fighting off the complaints from Wisconsin, Illinois, and Michigan -- the other three states that share the lake -- could easily be ten times that.
All in all, a dumbass move that makes absolutely no sense for the state whatsoever. I wonder who got bribed, and with how much?
Schwab
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I have you know that I have never, and will never, accept a bribe. Even one that only affects the enviorment, which we all know will be gone in five years when the rapture comes...
Now I am afraid I must go buff my solid gold Bently. You would not believe the amount of dings and scratches it
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't dump there. (Score:2)
learn to read hippies (Score:3, Interesting)
they aren't exempt from anything, they merely got permision to use the maximum level allowed.
i don't see the issue unless you are planning on swimming right beside the outlet pipe. http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0209/featu re2/online_extra.html [nationalgeographic.com]
people USE 2.4 billion gallons a DAY and it doesn't even make a dent in the lake, so you can imagine the bullshit tiny % of pollution a few thousand pounds makes. I'd bet money animals and humans contribute more pollution to the river in the form of urine per day.
so why don't you all try and have some perspective for once and not jump on the "omgz the evil corperation is killing the world" bandwagon.
Learn to read, genius (Score:3, Informative)
Umm...
See the difference?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
" the Clean Water Act that prohibits any downgrade in water quality near a pollution source even if discharge limits are met"
They aren't exempt from pollution guidlines at all like you and the submitter are trying to pretend, they have merely allowed BP to pollute to the maximum amount allowed under the act. prior to this BP were putting out far less, the issue is that the act is poorly written and inflexible.
What about everyone else... (Score:2, Insightful)
Not enough space? (Score:3)
On their 1400 ACRE site.
Oy.
Neglible compared to fish poop (Score:3, Insightful)
Outrage! (Score:3, Insightful)
If you fill up at a BP normally, will you stop doing that? Or will you do what's easier, more convenient?
I live in central Indiana, and I really don't like the idea of more waste being dumped in Lake Michigan. It's fould as it stands. I wouldn't go swimming in it unless I wanted a few layers of flesh stripped off and loss of ability to reproduce. I may write a letter (that will be looked over, glossed over, and discared by aides) to congressman, senators, and the governor. I probably won't. I'm under no illusions it will do any good. I'm not going to drive less. I don't really go many places other than work and I, sadly, can't quit my job yet. I walk to the grocery store, same as I've done for two years. And I won't stop filling up at BP either. It's directly on my way home from work. It's too convenient to not drive 2 blocks out of the way to put the same gas in my car, but at a "Speedway."
Other than bitch and moan, what is anyone here willing to do, to change in their own lives because of this? The answer is probably nothing.
As Kurt Vonnegut might have said, "So it goes."
Yep, Canadian oil is yucky, but unavoidable (Score:3, Informative)
In the long run, though, this stuff will eventually be cleaner for refineries since it will be "upgraded" to a synthetic crude oil in Canada to remove most of the metals, sulfer, and nitrogen compounds. Google "oil upgrader" for more info.
I know this won't be popular but... (Score:3, Insightful)
It seems to me that with the cost of oil banging on $80-a-barrel's door, Venezuela driving out American oil interests, and with no truly efficient alternative in sight, we will have little choice but to enable more production State side. The downside to more production will always be more pollution, but the upside will theoretically be lower costs for oil and, consequently, gasoline.
I realize the green flag is a popular one to wave around here, but what are our real options? I hate to see natural resources contaminated, but I hate to pay such high gas prices, too.
I'm not saying pollution is a good thing, but unless there are viable alternatives to refined oil for energy we are going to see more of this sort of news in the future. Either except pollution as the fee we will pay for lower gas prices, or propose new energy sources. The demand for low cost fuel isn't going to wait for anybody, green or otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is bad? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you noticed also, sludge containing heavy metals will also be dumped. mmm....mercury
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
more then likely it was just a supervisor's fuck up, not realising the danger. as someone who has actually worked in this kind of industry the amount of saftey hysterial is driving me mad. every single thing i do i have to fill out a risk assessment form. i'm safer at work then i am at home.
Re: (Score:2)
see it IS driving me mad.