Wisconsin residents objecting to pollution from Indiana refinery
By DAVID STEINKRAUS
Journal Times | Posted: Thursday, August 16, 2007 12:00 am
As the crow flies it's 73 miles from Racine straight southeast across the lake to the BP refinery in Whiting, Ind., but to Sister Janet Weyker of Caledonia, it's close enough for anyone concerned about the welfare of Lake Michigan.
She was one of 70,000 people who signed an online petition protesting a permit issued by the state of Indiana which allows the refinery to increase its discharge of ammonia and solids into the lake. That's part of a plan for a $3 billion modernization of the refinery to handle crude oil from Canada, which, the company's Web site says, will provide the Midwest with a stable supply of fuel.
However, the refinery waste discharge will increase to 1,500 pounds of ammonia and 5,000 pounds of suspended solids per day, increases of 54 percent and 35 percent respectively. That is within federal guidelines, the company says.
Residents don't see it that way, and they have complained about the permit process used by Indiana. The Alliance for the Great Lakes on Wednesday filed a petition with the state asking for a review of that process. Some state and federal officials are interested, too, said Dan Kohler, director of Environment Wisconsin, which started the online petition.
Weyker, of the Eco Justice Center of the Racine Dominicans, doesn't see it that way. "That seems to go against anything that the Clean Water Act stands for."
In the same way that coal-fired power plants affect the whole lake, so does this project, she said. The lake's ecosystems need to be protected no matter where they are because everyone has a stake in the lake's water. "Everybody adds a little bad stuff to the lake; it does make a difference."
That's also the consensus of several scientists at the Great Lakes Water Institute of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. It's very unlikely that people here would see a direct effect from the refinery's waste discharge, they said.
The near shore current would carry waste toward the Indiana shore and then up the Michigan coast. Most effects, however, would probably be very localized near the refinery, the scientists said.
Ammonia in the water is readily used by microorganisms; it's a high-energy molecule for them, said Harvey Bootsma, an associate scientist at the institute who studies algae and nutrients.
"It'll create a plankton bloom of some sort," said Michael Carvan, an institute associate scientist who specializes in toxicity and sensitivity to environmental chemicals. It's not likely to be a large bloom because the small plants wouldn't have enough phosphorus to grow vigorously, he said.
"The particulates," Carvan said, "the thing that's worrying about the particulates is it's going to contain a lot of toxic chemicals." There will be cadmium, mercury, all the heavy metals coming from the crude oil in those suspended solids. "It's never good to put that into the lake."
Depending on the size of the particles, they might be ingested by zebra and quaaga mussels, and then either absorbed by those organisms or released into the sand where it will be picked up by other organisms in the food chain, he said.
The particles might also reduce the amount of light penetrating the water, which might reduce plant growth, Bootsma said.
BP says it will spend $150 million to upgrade its water-treatment equipment. The best thing, Carvan said, would be for the company to build a treatment plant like those serving municipalities; technology exists to clean water of most of the contaminants from the refinery.
This past weekend, more than 50 people in Milwaukee, Madison and Chicago demonstrated at BP gas stations, passing out fliers about the refinery and encouraging motorists to fill their automobiles elsewhere, said Kohler. Many did, and the group is planning future protests. This weekend, a sister organization, Environment Michigan, will hold a similar protest in Ann Arbor, Mich.