In the Great Lakes region that includes the upper Midwest and parts of southern Canada, we have the largest fresh water system on earth.  Did you want to start siphoning off our water and selling it to China?  Not so fast…

Read more of this story »

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has raised numerous objections to the permit, which was blocked on October 1. One concern is that the permit may not sufficiently limit chromium, cadmium, silver, cyanide and other chemicals to meet water quality standards for Indiana.

This is the second uproar in recent months about pollutants in Lake Michigan after BP was issued a permit for its $3 billion expansion of the Whitting, IN refinery. This expansion would allow the refinery to handle large quantities of Alberta Tar Sands crude, and comes with a high environmental price tag for Lake Michigan, such as a 54% increase in ammonia and 35% increase in sludge particles being released. This permit was the first to be issued in years that would increase the amount of pollution that a company is allowed to emit into Lake Michigan by finding a loophole in the Clean Water Act.

Chicagoans were particularly alarmed by these plans because their drinking water intake is located just a few miles from the Whiting refinery discharge. Many area residents responded by signing petitions, participating in demonstrations and a boycotting BP products. The message was heard loud and clear. The company later announced that it would not increase discharge into the lake, and would investigate pollution control technologies.

Despite this announcement, the permit remains on the books and could set a lower standard for future discharge permits. This series of events does, however, demonstrate the influence that private citizens and politicians can have over the actions of corporations when government standards seem to be satisfactory. Recent threats to the water quality of Lake Michigan serve as a reminder of the importance of the lake, which is the largest freshwater lake in the United States.

Chicago Tribune: Indiana Giving Lake Polluter a Break

Also on GO:

Eco-Effective Decisions: Stick to the Claims in Your Ad Campaign. Who’s Not? British Petroleum & the EPA.

Well, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently made an exception to this law for the $3.8 billion expansion of British Petroleum’s (BP’s) Whiting, Indiana plant. In exchange, the expansion is said to provide 80 more permanent jobs and 2,000 temporary construction jobs. The trade-off for this socio-economical exchange is 35% more sludge (a total of 4,925 pounds), and 54% more ammonia (a total of 1,584 pounds) pumped into Lake Michigan daily. Even though this increase in pollution is still below the federal and state limits, it is the first decision in years that allows a company to dump more toxic waste into Lake Michigan.
For a company that considers themselves "Beyond Petroleum" by supporting alternative energy development and environmental protection, they certainly are not displaying much attention beyond their own petroleum processing?

This Whiting, Indiana plant (currently the nation’s 4th largest refinery) was originally built in 1889 by John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Co. We are happy that they are using the same facility, but due to the extra crude oil coming from Canada, BP can’t process the expanded volume in the same "small" plant. Therefore, the expansion became the obvious solution. The state excused this severe hike in pollution by saying the project will provide more jobs and security of oil suppliers to the Midwestern United States.

This is what the trade-off actually is: this "toxic sludge" is a cocktail of concentrated heavy metals and suspended solids that does not-so-nicely mix with our fresh-water swimming lakes. The ammonia becomes a problem when it provides a habitat for healthy algae bloom, thus killing the native fish, and altering the aquaculture of the fresh water.

Since the public announcement of the EPA permit grant in mid-June, people are also unhappy with the way these events rolled out. An environmental group, the Alliance for the Great Lakes, filed a petition asking Indiana’s Office of Environmental Adjudication to suspend the permit and reopen the appeal process due to inadequate public scrutiny. When the permit draft was made available for review, many organizations submitted comments on it. Yet, when the final permit was made available, these organizations were not informed on the proper date, nor were they informed of the appeal process. Now the Indiana Department of Environmental Management claims that the appeal process is closed because it is 15 days past the post date of the final permit. Over 70,000 people across the Great Lakes and the nation have signed this petition.

Additionally, Great Lakes supporters spread out over BP stations all over the Midwest region handing out flyers explaining the situation and requesting that customers fill up elsewhere. As this momentum builds, awareness speads, and hopefully BP will either change their ways or admit that they are beyond caring about the Great Lakes. We prefer the former to the later.

To sign the petition yourself go to:
Environment Michigan