Plans to phase lead out of gas upheld
to see EC insist that the U.S. raise its low rates in order to achieve harmonization. Nine different proposals now have been presented for "study purposes." And it probably will take most of this year for negotiators to agree on an acceptable tariff-cutting formula. Although the Office of the Special Trade Representative hasn't revealed its exact formula, it has made it clear that it is aiming high in its tariffcutting ambitions. Its proposal would result in average reductions of 50 to 60%. The Trade Reform Act limits the President's tar iff-cutting authority to 60% on all rates more than 5% ad valorem. Existing rates less than 5% may be eliminated completely. •
Labor joins nuclear forces in California AFL-CIO, the U.S.'s largest labor organization, is stepping up its campaign in favor of nuclear power. The issue, as labor sees it, is clear: Nuclear energy means jobs, and jobs are good for labor. The main focus of recent union moves is the so-called California Nuclear Initiative, or Proposition 15, scheduled to appear on the state's June 8 primary election ballot. On its face, the referendum calls on voters to decide whether nuclear energy in California is safe. Opponents of the referendum claim that it is nothing more than a thinly veiled effort by nuclear critics to shut down California's nuclear power industry (C&EN, Dec. 1,1975, page 8). Prevailing union thinking is that jobs will be lost if nuclear power production is curtailed. Unionists are worried not only about jobs lost for workers who build and operate nuclear generating plants, but about jobs that depend on abundant energy to keep industry humming. Likewise, they fear that passage of the California law will encourage initiatives elsewhere—now contemplated in at least 13 states by union count. In two more states, Oregon and Colorado, initiatives similar to California's will appear on ballots in the November general election. Labor sentiments crystallized at mid-month at an energy conference in the nation's capital sponsored by AFL-CIO's industrial union department. Labor leaders, predictably, lined up for nuclear energy and against the California initiative. Says AFL-CIO secretary-treasurer Lane Kirkland: "Nuclear energy is the target of a well-organized drive to ban its use. The basis of that campaign is
dayman: a deliberate effort
that nuclear energy is not safe. We do not agree with that assessment." More candid is the industrial union department secretary-treasurer Jacob d a y m a n ' s view of Proposition 15 as "a deliberate effort, with malice aforethought, to end nuclear energy in California." Those behind the initiative, Clayman affirms, "don't have to worry about jobs and material things," unlike the average worker who "has to find his place in the sun, too." Last month, AFL-CIO's executive council at the labor group's annual meeting in Bal Harbour, Fla., issued a formal statement opposing the California initiative, saying, in part, t h a t AFL-CIO urges "all union members and, indeed, all California voters to vote against the initiative." At the Washington meeting, J. C. Turner, president of the International Union of Operating Engineers, said he, too, would urge his union's 70,000 members in the state to work against the initiative. Recent polls show that public opinion in the state seems to split on the nuclear issue. But union opposition to Proposition 15 may spell the difference in the outcome on June 8. For one thing labor has organization, and this can make, and has made, the difference in many an election. For another, labor also has money that can just as easily be spent defeating a ballot proposition as it can be on defeating a politician unpopular with labor. AFL-CIO is already passing out to journalists packets containing pronuclear articles, background fact sheets from the nuclear industry, printed endorsements by atomic scientists, and statements by union leaders calling for the defeat of Proposition 15. •
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has held, in a 5-to-4 decision, that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have to have firm data proving actual physical harm before it can ban or limit air emissions. The decision, which has broad implications, was handed down in a suit challenging EPA regulations on lead additives in gasoline. The court also says that EPA can go ahead with its plan to phase out the use of most lead additives in gasoline over a five-year period. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge J. Skelly Wright pointed out that a statute such as the Clean Air Act of 1972 "allowing for regulation in the face of danger is, necessarily, a precautionary statute." He adds that "regulatory action may be taken before the threatened harm occurs: indeed the very existence of such precautionary legislation would seem to demand that regulatory action precede and, optimally, prevent the perceived threat." The majority opinion goes on to say that EPA acted properly in basing its decision on "the inconclusive but suggestive results of numerous studies. By its nature, scientific evidence is often cumulative; the more supporting albeit inconclusive evidence available, the more likely the accuracy of the conclusion." Further, the court holds that "in making his policy judgments by assessing risks the administrator is not required to limit his consideration to the dangers presented by lead additives 'in and of themselves.' He may consider the cumulative impact of lead additives with other sources of human exposure to lead." And the court says that the "vast bulk of the evidence . . . provides inferences, no one of which is dispositive, which support" EPA's finding. However, the four-judge minority vigorously dissented from the majority opinion, saying that EPA's analysis of the data "reflected a clear error of judgment upon the available evidence." As a result, the minority opinion says, EPA's regulation was "Hamlet-like, a blind stab through a curtain of ignorance, inflicting anguish, but in our judgment not rationally solving any problem." EPA says it is "delighted" with the court's decision and is now deciding whether to stand by the time limit in the original rules, slated to go into effect in 1975, which required a 65% reduction in lead additives by 1980 or devise a new timetable. However, at press time, two of the companies inMarch29, 1976 C&EN
5
volved in the suit—Ethyl Corp. and Nalco Chemical—already had indicated that they will appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. The three other organizations involved in the suit, Du Pont, PPG Industries, and the National Petroleum Refiners Association, are reviewing the decision before deciding on further litigation. •
Petrochemical role in economy detailed Companies making petrochemicals in Texas last week stepped up their efforts to ensure future supplies of their oil and gas feedstocks. In a series of presentations to state government officials, representatives of 17 companies summarized a study by Arthur D. Little Inc. The major finding was that nearly $130 billion in finished products are made around the country based on Texas-produced petrochemicals. More specifically, the value of the finished products accounts for about 13% of the gross national product. Making these products provides almost 3 million jobs, the ADL study shows. The companies involved in the presentation were Celanese, Dart Industries, Dow Chemical, Du Pont, Ethyl Corp., Firestone Tire & Rubber, Goodyear Tire & Rubber, Hercules, Monsanto, National Distillers & Chemical, Olin, Oxirane, Petro-Tex Chemical, P P G Industries, Rohm & Haas, Texas Eastman, and Union Carbide. Much emphasis in their presentation went on the higher value of oil and gas when used to make petrochemicals rather than burned as fuels. Revenue from the state's oil and gas reserves could continue to climb despite declining production rates, they add. To do this an adequate supply of oil and gas must be made available to
Oil worth much more as chemicals than as fuel Crude oil Fuel Petrochemical Consumer products IUU Dollars 3 a Value of 1 bbl of oil at various stages of processing. Source: Arthur D. Little Inc.
6
C&EN March 29, 1976
200
the growing petrochemical industry. For example, a barrel of crude oil shipped from Texas provides a return of about $9.00. If, however, the hydrocarbons in the crude oil are converted through petrochemicals to finished products, the equivalent value can reach as high as $200. Texas oil and gas production peaked in 1972 at the equivalent of about 8.5 million bbl per day. That year, the petrochemical industry used about 7%, or 570,000 bbl per day. By 1985 the state's production is forecast to decline to 7.5 million bbl per day of crude oil equivalent. That year, petrochemicals could be using 21% or 1.6 million bbl per day. The value of the products made in the state's petrochemical industry in 1972 was about $6 billion, according to the study. This was about 10 times the value of the equivalent crude oil used. In 1985, according to the growth projections, the value of such products would exceed $17 billion. The largest production value, $27.8 billion, for industry dependent on Texas petrochemicals occurs in the South Atlantic region—Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia—according to details released from the ADL study. Closely following is the East North Central region at $27.6 billion. Then comes the Middle Atlantic region at $23.6 billion. The West South Central region—Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas itself—ranks a distant fifth at $10.0 billion. Payrolls of industries dependent on Texas petrochemicals total $20.6 billion annually. The largest share is paid out in the Middle Atlantic region at $4.8 billion, followed by East North Central and South Atlantic regions at $4.6 billion each. •
University sets rules on genetic research A committee of 11 University of Michigan faculty members has recommended that recombinant DNA research at the university "should, in principle, go forward, so long as it has been submitted to appropriate controls." There was one dissent. The committee, headed by social scientist Alvin Zander, also includes members of the law, philosophy, history, and humanities departments: only four of the 11 have backgrounds in medical or biological science. Recombinant DNA experimentation, sometimes called genetic engineering, involves transplanting genetic material from one living cell to another, in effect creating new forms
of life. There are potential benefits; for example, new bacteria could be developed to produce hormones, blood clotting factors, antibodies, or other medically useful substances. But there are also risks. New strains of pathogenic organisms could be resistant to antibiotics: previously harmless bacteria could become virulent pathogens. Because of the risks, there has been a call for a moratorium on such research pending development of guidelines to minimize the dangers. A panel of scientists assembled by the National Institutes of Health has been wrestling with the problem and has come up with proposed ground rules setting standards for physical and biological containment of organisms (C&EN, Feb. 16, page 6). "We believe that the current NIH guidelines are an acceptable basis for assuring the safety of experimentation in molecular genetics," the Michigan committee says. Although some small risk remains, "this risk should not bar experimentation." The committee recommends additional restrictions, however. Certain "highrisk" experiments would be banned at Michigan. A review committee would be established "to ensure that laboratory equipment and facilities are appropriate." In addition, "somebody"—perhaps the university's senate assembly research committee—should occasionally review the review committee and also the NIH guidelines. The lone dissenter, historian Shaw Livermore, believes that the University of Michigan should not encourage recombinant DNA research. There might well be benefits from such research, he says, but "the limitations of our social capacities for directing such a capability . . . will more likely bring . . . a train of awesome and possibly disastrous consequences." Other schools, including Harvard and California Institute of Technology, also have faculty and staff groups working on policies, procedures, and controls for possibly hazardous genetic research. However, the Michigan committee is apparently the first to go on record with its proposals. •
Special centennial issue C&EN will publish a special issue on April 6 to celebrate the Centennial of the American Chemical Society, founded on April 6, 1876, in New York City. This is in addition to the regular weekly issue of C&EN, dated April 5. The special commemorative issue will highlight the history of the society as well as major advances in chemistry over the past 100 years.
