December 31st 2024.
The Environmental Protection Agency has recently issued an order to the state of Colorado, asking them to take a closer look at Suncor Energy's air pollution permit for their Commerce City refinery. This marks the third time in just two years that the EPA has raised concerns about the permit, leaving many environmentalists wondering if the state is truly committed to enforcing federal air quality laws in the area.
This latest order specifically focuses on the Title V permit for Plants 1 & 3 at the refinery, which are responsible for refining crude oil into gasoline, fuels, and asphalt. The EPA has already sent the Title V permit for Plant 2 back to the state twice, after environmental groups expressed objections to certain measures within the permit. All three plants are located on the refinery's campus along Brighton Boulevard.
The EPA is now asking the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment to either revise the monitoring requirements for the amount of pollution emitted by the refinery or provide a thorough explanation for their decision-making in the initial permit application. The order also directs the state to determine whether additional operational measures are necessary to ensure that the fluid catalytic cracking unit, used to convert crude oil to petroleum products, is not exceeding pollution limits.
KC Becker, the EPA's regional administrator, stated that this order is a crucial step in addressing the challenges at the Suncor refinery. She also emphasized the agency's commitment to working with Colorado to ensure that the refinery complies with all laws and regulations to safeguard the health of nearby residents.
The air permit for Plants 1 & 3 was finally issued on July 9, after being six years overdue. However, the EPA received a petition from Earthjustice, an environmental law group, on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity and the Sierra Club, requesting that the permit be sent back to the state for revisions. The EPA agreed with five of the claims in the petition and partially agreed with two others. Their recommendations to the state are similar to the order they issued for Plant 2, which is still under review after two objections from the EPA.
Jeremy Nichols, a senior advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity, expressed surprise that the state did not include the EPA's recommendations for Plant 2 when submitting the permit application for Plants 1 & 3. He stated that they were baffled by the state's reluctance to comply with the EPA's guidance.
The main issue for environmentalists is the amount of monitoring conducted at the Suncor refinery to determine the emissions of harmful pollutants, especially carbon monoxide and fine particulate matter. These tiny particles, made up of dust, ash, soot, and smoke, are released into the air during the refining process. The refinery also emits nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and other toxins, which contribute to air pollution and climate change. They can also have severe health impacts, especially for those with breathing difficulties like asthma. The air permit sets limits for the amount of these pollutants that the refinery is allowed to release.
Nichols argues that the state's assumption that emission rates remain constant is faulty, as Suncor has repeatedly violated the limits established in their current permits. He believes that the only way to ensure compliance is through direct emissions testing, a stance that the EPA also agrees with.
Efforts to reach Suncor officials for comment were unsuccessful, and a CDPHE spokeswoman stated that their experts are currently reviewing the EPA's order.
The two permits for Suncor's three production plants are remnants from when they were owned by separate companies. When Suncor acquired these plants, the permits were not consolidated, despite them all being under one operator now. Both permits were long overdue when submitted to the EPA for approval, and under federal law, Suncor was allowed to continue refining crude oil under their old permits. However, now that the EPA has asked for revisions, the refinery is operating under the updated versions.
In a rare move, the EPA objected to sections of the air permit for a second time in August 2023. This was seen as a victory by multiple environmental groups who argued that the state was not doing enough to limit Suncor's pollution.
Despite this, the permit for Plant 2 is still under review, causing growing frustration among environmentalists and residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. During a public hearing on December 10, critics heavily criticized the state for what they see as a reluctance to enforce stricter regulations on Suncor's pollution. They accused the CDPHE of prioritizing the company's bottom line over the health of the community.
Nichols believes that the EPA's latest objection to sections of the Suncor permit is yet another example of the state's failure to properly regulate the refinery. He hopes that the state will finally take heed of environmentalists' demands and the EPA's recommendations. He finds it disappointing that they have had to continuously push for stricter regulations and hopes that the CDPHE will listen and make the necessary changes to protect the health of the community.
[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]
