NEWS OF THE W EEK
EPA REBUKED DEREGULATION: Congress asks for more analysis of proposal for burning hazardous waste as fuel
H
OUSE LAWMAKERS are asking EPA to take a closer look at its hazardous waste deregulation proposal, which the chemical industry sought. The plan, released in June, would allow companies to burn hazardous waste as fuel in industrial boilers, which provide heat or power. This substitution only would be allowed if such burning generates air pollution that is comparable to emissions produced by combustion of fuel oil in the boiler. Much of the material the proposal would affect now goes to hazardous waste incinerators, which are more stringently regulated than industrial boilers. In a letter sent last week, 25 members of the House of Representatives asked EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson to assess the proposal’s environmental impact at each of 86 industrial facilities expected to benefit from the regulatory rollback. They also faulted EPA’s proposal for not including the names and locations of those facilities and how much waste they are expected to burn if the rule becomes final. “The communities that would see increases in toxic pollutants were not notified until after the EPA comment period ended,” says Rep. Mark S. Kirk (R-Ill.), who signed the letter. This timing, says Rep. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.), another signatory, means “EPA knowingly denied communities the chance to comment.” EPA data, obtained by the environmental group Earthjustice under the Freedom of Information Act, show that DuPont could benefit the most from the
proposed deregulation. Each year, DuPont WASTE AWAY could burn in industrial Facilities expected to burn most hazardous boilers an estimated waste as fuel under EPA proposal 7,191 tons of mateANNUAL rial now classified as WASTE hazardous waste. TwoCOMPANY LOCATION (TONS) DuPont La Porte, Texas 4,784 thirds of this tonnage Sunoco Philadelphia 3,103 would come from DuPPG Lake Charles, La. 2,811 Pont’s La Porte, Texas, Occidental Chemical Gregory, Texas 2,264 facility. Eli Lilly & Co. Lafayette, Ind. 2,258 DuPont says the Eastman Kodak Rochester, N.Y. 2,139 Texas facility’s waste Sunoco Haverhill, Ohio 2,112 is composed of organic Sterling Chemicals Texas City, Texas 1,940 Eastman Chemical Kingsport, Tenn. 1,791 compounds and now Safety Kleen Systems Dolton, Ill. 1,786 goes to a companyowned incinerator with SOURCE: EPA a permit to burn hazardous waste. “If the proposed rule becomes official, we would certainly be interested in analyzing whether the waste stream would qualify,” DuPont spokesman Nathan Pepper, tells C&EN. Other companies and the amount of waste now classified as hazardous that EPA estimates they could divert into boilers each year include Sunoco, 5,215 tons at two facilities; Eastman Chemical, 3,815 tons at three facilities; and PPG Industries, 3,542 tons at four facilities. EPA estimates the proposal could affect as much as 107,000 tons of material now classified as hazardous waste. The agency calculates the plan would save industry $23 million a year in fuel and hazardous waste management costs. Two industry groups, the American Chemistry Council and the National Association of Manufacturers, sought the regulatory change. In 2005 the Bush Administration instructed EPA to act on this request as part of an initiative to relax regulation of the manufacturing sector (C&EN, March 14, 2005, page 29).—CHERYL HOGUE
PETROCHEMICALS Dow and Gazprom consider German and Russian ventures In its latest bid for low-cost chemical feedstocks and access to emerging markets, Dow Chemical is teaming up with Russia’s Gazprom, the world’s largest producer of natural gas. The companies, along with Sibur, Gazprom’s chemical arm, have signed a letter of intent to cooperate in hydrocarbon processing and petrochemicals. Dow and Gazprom will study the feasibility of forming a joint venture to process gas extracted from the Valangin deposits in the Yamalo-Nenets autonomous area in western Siberia. The companies are considering using the gas to feed a new ethylene cracker that
could be built at one of Dow’s German sites. They are also weighing the option of building a petrochemical complex in Russia based on the gas. A Dow spokesman cautions that the cooperation is in its early stages. “We have been talking to Gazprom for some time about what we may do together; this is another step in that process,” he says. He notes that Dow could opt for only the Russian petrochemical project, the German one, or both. Dow has been aggressively advancing plans for new petrochemical plants in regions with plentiful raw materials or expanding markets. In the Middle East,
WWW.C E N- ONLI NE .ORG
13
D EC E M BE R 3, 20 07
which offers low-cost raw materials, the company is planning joint ventures with state oil companies in Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Oman. The Oman project, Dow acknowledges, has been languishing. In China, the company is working with local mining firm Shenhua to study the feasibility of a coal-based chemical complex. It is also expanding a joint venture in Thailand with Siam Cement. Last week, Siam Cement announced that it is moving forward with a 350,000-metric-ton-per-year linear low-density polyethylene plant to be constructed with Dow.—ALEXANDER TULLO
