RSS Feed
Print Story
E-mail Story
Top area polluters tracked
Refineries, plants among worst offenders
| Sunday, Sep 24 2006 11:10 PM
Last Updated: Sunday, Sep 24 2006 11:14 PM
Who are the valley's biggest polluters?
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:
Loading Stories
Advertisement
After checking with the state Air Resources Board, poring over its "High Emitting Facilities" list and working in a few caveats, here's what we came up with.
Who's on the list?
Several refineries, factories and power plants are the biggest single sources of emissions in the San Joaquin Valley, according to the list. But the list does not include cars, trucks, plants, dairies and other less-concentrated sources of emissions. Italsoleaves out military bases and landfills because of regional differences in how they're reported.
The top-emitters list is based on past data. The lag time is a few years, state air officials said. For example, data published in 2006 is based on info gathered by local air districts in 2003.
You can look up this information in annual editions of the California Almanac of Emissions and Air Quality at www.arb.ca.gov/aqd/almanac/almanac.htm.
What's the biggest polluter category?
By far, it's cars, trucks, trains and aerosol cans -- not factories, power plants and other stationary sources.
Collectively, the little emitters, such as residential fireplaces, vehicles, farms and household products, create vast pools of pollution. Power plants and factories are known for their nitrogen oxides emissions, yet they produce less than half the nitrogen oxides that come from cars, trucks, trains, mobile farm equipment and other moving sources in the valley.
Emissions are way down from 1999 among stationary sources. Why?
Because the rules are getting tighter and tighter, said Brenda Turner, spokeswoman for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, which regulates stationary sources of pollution. "So many of our large facilities (are) close to the amount of reductions that are even possible," she said.
Big stationary facilities have been through several generations of pollution-cutting technology in an attempt to meet new rules, said Roger Christy, a spokesman and air-quality expert for Chevron USA. The rules continue to touch every kind of oil-field engine, he said.
Cutting pollution "is getting tougher to do," he said. "You're kind of getting into diminishing returns."
Valley air district staffers agree, but factories and power plants are some of the only polluters the district can regulate directly. It's "a huge frustration" that the district can't touch cars, tractors and other moving sources of pollution, which account for more than half of the valley's smog-forming emissions, Turner said.
The district is now trying an indirect route to regulate pollution from cars and trucks.
In March, it began levying fees on builders to help offset pollution created by more car trips to new subdivisions, strip malls and office buildings.
Money collected by the district -- estimated to be $103 million in the first three years -- would go toward paving unpaved roads, replacing dirty engines and other equipment.
The fees vary depending on a number of factors. For example, someone building a 75-home development would pay about $780 per house.
But those fees can be reduced if the builder installs bike lanes, includes bus service, builds near existing shopping and jobs and other means.
District staffers agreed that it would be virtually impossible for builders to reduce fees to zero because of the lack of public transportation in the valley.
And fees will increase as it gets more expensive to replace engines and other polluting equipment.
The program is being challenged by builders, who filed suit against the district in June.
What is the district going to do to meet new standards?
This fall the valley air district will unveil its plan to cut smog by the 2013 deadline. To do it, the district will have to cut emissions by as much as 60 percent, staffers say.
Regulators are looking at unconventional strategies, such as putting emission limits on businesses and letting them make pollution cuts however they see fit -- at their own operations or off site, whichever is most cost effective. The district also is looking for as much as $1 billion from the state and federal government to help businesses and consumers replace polluting engines.
What do the "High Emitting Facilities" have to say?
The Californian contacted every company on the 2006 list, and many were eager to explain their air-friendly practices.
See "What companies say" to find out what each facility is doing to cut down on emissions.
How is the valley's air quality overall?
The number of days we violate federal air standards continues to fall, but so do the standards themselves. By most measures the air is getting better, but it's not good enough to meet ever-tightening air rules.
We have met one standard for particulate pollution known as PM 10, but the federal government might eliminate the standard in favor of one that governs tinier particles. We also recently met a standard for those tiny particles, according to the air district.