California is home to AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 authored by State Senator Fran Pavley that caps and trades carbon pollution, mandates lower carbon fuel, higher mileage from automobiles, energy efficiency, and puts the state at the forefront of the clean energy economy.

California is also home to 15 billion barrels of oil that now can be easily recovered using modern fracking technology. The state has always had some oil, as anyone who’s ever seen There Will Be Blood or cleaned up a Santa Barbara spill can attest. But the wells got old, and most of the good milkshakes got drank, until fracking – the art of using a very long bendy straw – came along. And now Venoco, Occidental Petroleum, and others are salivating at the thought of fracking up California. The New York Times’ story on vast oil reserves now within reach has gotten national attention. Rightwing papers are asking: could the Monterey Shale save California? (never mind that California saved itself by depriving Republicans of their hostage-taking abilities). From the Times:

Comprising two-thirds of the United States’s total estimated shale oil reserves and covering 1,750 square miles from Southern to Central California, the Monterey Shale could turn California into the nation’s top oil-producing state and yield the kind of riches that far smaller shale oil deposits have showered on North Dakota and Texas.

California’s 15 billion barrels of easily fracked oil are roughly four times the size of the Bakken formation. It’s enough to bedazzle Democratic lawmakers. Once known for their environmentalism, they’re rushing to gut, oops, I mean amend, the California Environmental Quality Act, just in time for the embarrassment of fracked-up blood money.

Alas, neither the New York Times nor any of the pieces predicting untold riches for the state bother to calculate what burning all this shale oil will do to the climate.

What will 15 billion barrels of oil do to the state’s efforts to fight global warming?

I did the math.

An Environmental Protection Agency calculator explains that burning one barrel of oil releases 0.43 metric ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Burning 15 billion barrels thus releases 6.45 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide. Think of it as a very, very large, fat-and-sugar-loaded, milkshake sitting on a table waiting to be drank.

Generally, AB32 set a goal of rolling back emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The state set a baseline of 507 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, and a goal of reducing that to 427 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. This PDF explains how the 507 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year was calculated along with estimated savings from various programs within AB32, e.g., the Pavley (high miles per gallon) standards will save 27.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year. It’s a smart, well balanced diet for the state’s carbon footprint.

In other words, releasing 6.45 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere is the equivalent of delaying a planned reduction of 80 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year – for 80 years.

And that’s just fracked up.

I hope that Fran Pavley, California’s fiercest climate hawk, will declare that high-fat milkshakes have no place in a balanced diet, and champion the fight for a moratorium on fracking up the Golden State.

The London-based Control Risks holds itself out as “an independent global risk consultancy specialising in helping organizations manage political, integrity, and security risks in complex and hostile environments.” Or, in practical terms, it provides anti-piracy services, handles kidnappings and other crises, and writes white papers analyzing terrorism risks in various countries. One suspects that this expertise doesn’t come cheap. Clients buy discretion for large sums of cash, but SourceWatch notes “a long history of working with the energy sector, covering ground in Algeria, Angola, Congo, Nigeria, Russia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Dubai (United Arab Emirates), Sudan and Yemen.”  And now it’s advising unnamed, but presumably energy-oriented and rich, businesses how to handle fracking activists.

Because a worried upstate New York farmer has a lot in common with a Somali pirate.

The splash page on “The Global Anti-Fracking Movement: What it wants, how it operates, and what’s next” is here. You’re supposed to be able to download the report only by giving an email address to receive more briefings, and if you’re a senior executive in the oil and gas industry you can get the report and a complimentary personal briefing. For those of us who are not senior executives in the oil and gas industry and who don’t want want to give our email address to a shadowy international business that may count Halliburton and Bechtel among its clients, here is the entire report (pdf format).

The report views American environmental activists through the same hostile lens as it uses on kidnappers of Exxon executives. It is shocked to report that “A notable feature of the anti-fracking movement – shared with other social movements such as Occupy – is the extensive use of online social media to disseminate information, organise and mobilise.” (p.8)

The white paper carefully separates those who call for an outright ban from those seeking tighter regulation: “the majority of the anti-fracking movement simply wants tighter environmental regulation of unconventional gas development. With tighter regulation, enforcement and accountability, a sizeable swathe of the anti-fracking movement – from grassroots activists with single-issue grievances to influential environmental NGOs such as the Us’s Natural Resources defense Council (NRdC) – is prepared to drop its objection to hydraulic fracturing.” (p.5) And it goes on to discuss, without actually suggesting that big green groups concerned about climate should co-opt local people concerned about their food and water supply, wink, nudge (p.9):

International environmental NGOs also play a key global networking role. For example, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly World Wildlife Fund) each mount anti-fracking advocacy campaigns and support local anti-fracking groups. yet in contrast with grassroots activists, focused primarily on local social, economic and environmental impacts, international environmental NGOs situate unconventional gas extraction largely within their efforts on climate change.

The intervention of international NGOs has inevitably pulled the anti-fracking movement – at the global level – towards the climate change agenda, meaning that purely climate change-focused groups, such as 350.org, have obtained a prominent position. This

has occasionally resulted in friction within the anti-fracking movement, to the extent that some climate change-focused NGOs – though not the three listed above – view unconventional gas as a low carbon alternative to coal. Not only do such groups ignore

pressing local impact concerns, they may also be more amenable to tighter regulation as opposed to an outright ban.

Control Risks’ final suggestions for handling those pesky activists: “acknowledge grievances,” “engage local communities,” “reduce impacts,” and “create more winners” (pay people).  But nothing about actually listening to the activists, cleaning up wastewater, disclosing toxic fluids, or actually reducing carbon emissions.

California is next in line for a fracking boom, if the clients of Control Risks have their way – the federal Bureau of Land Management’s first auction of fracking leases sold 18,000 acres in ten minutes flat. The divide-and-conquer strategy is just beginning; most large green groups have stayed silent on the woefully insufficient draft regulations recently proposed, Very Serious Editorials opine that full disclosure of fracking fluids is somehow sufficient, bills being introduced echo the call for regulation rather than a moratorium, and efforts within the California Democratic Party to call for a moratorium are being watered down.

As for me, I’m not going to kidnap or terrorize the pro-fracking folk. I just don’t want them doing to the vineyards and suburbs of California what has been done to the farms of Pennsylvania and New York. If you live in California, click here to tell Governor Brown to ban fracking.

( – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

The fossil fuel industry is eyeing a new Gold Rush in the Golden State: the Monterey Shale, a natural gas play stretching from Monterey County south to Bakersfield, Santa Barbara, and the Baldwin Hills area of Los Angeles County. It’s said to hold more barrels than North Dakota’s Bakken Formation. “several oil companies, including Venoco and Occidental, have reported they are experimenting in California’s shale formations.”

Last week a convention was held on unlocking the Golden State’s shale resources, billed as “Be Part of the Biggest Thing to Hit California Since the Gold Rush!”

Today in Sacramento, the federal Bureau of Land Management is holding its first auction of 18,000 acres in Fresno, San Benito, and Monterey counties. A protest is being organized, complete with hazmat suits – you can RSVP here. If you can’t make it to Sacramento, here’s an online petition to tell the BLM – Don’t frack California.

The jury is out on whether natural gas, which is mostly methane, is actually as clean burning as it’s made out to be. California state regulators have lost track of whether California is being fracked; when they do re-regulate, they probably won’t track methane emissions at all. California agricultural interests are concerned about fracking our food supply. An earthquake inducing, water intensive process doesn’t seem like a good idea in an earthquake-prone, water-scarce state. The original Gold Rush pioneers didn’t worry about environmental degradation as they chased shiny yellow riches. The frackers will likewise heedlessly harm our air and water. Unless we speak up.

I’m organizing folk concerned about fracking in California – if interested, respond in comments with your email address, or tweet me @RL_Miller.

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? If a hazardous vapor spews out of an industrial plant, but no regulator reacts, was there ever a leak?

Well, on July 6, Evergreen Oil workers decided not to stick around to find out. Some 70 workers walked off the job the minute they heard there was a leak at the hazardous waste and used motor oil recycling plant. It was a “self-evacuation,” according to the Alameda County Fire Department. One worker did go to a medical facility, was evaluated for exposure, and later released. Everybody else came back sometime after the leak was contained in the mid-morning.

But no worries, said the Alameda Fire Department. The leak was harmless to people’s health. And Newark City officials patted Evergreen’s plant manager on the back for, get this, reporting the leak properly and quickly. Sadly, that could be a first.

Here’s what we know about Evergreen Oil up in Newark, California in the East Bay area:  It handles hazardous waste materials like anti-freeze and other toxic waste. And it’s the only oil refinery recycling used motor oil here in the West. It employs a couple of hundred workers, generates about $36 million in sales each year, and has been operating since the mid 1980s.

Now, recycling used motor oil is a great idea. We want to live sustainably. And we need to do something about the underbelly of toxic waste in California from chemicals used to make computers to the engine oil you left behind at your last oil change.

The problem is that Evergreen Oil’s operations aren’t safe. It’s a serial toxic polluter with a very long record. The point isn’t just this particular leak on July 6, which was quickly contained. The point is this leak is part of a much bigger problem involving Evergreen’s record of operations, and its ability to negotiate its way out any real accountability.

Since opening in 1986, nearly every agency with the ability to fine Evergreen has done so. Evergreen’s been cited for dangerous levels of cyanide, arsenic, and other harmful chemicals in its wastewater, for violating public health standards, for the toxic gases it has allowed to emanate from the site and that have, on occasion, reached the nostrils of school children, for poisonous fumes and odors at the site, for an explosion, and for illegally handling, treating and disposing of hazardous waste.

Yet, almost every single time, California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control has given Evergreen a pass to stay out of court with wrist-slap fines and promises the company will clean up its act. But somehow, Evergreen is never clean. Since it opened, Evergreen has had at least five major fires at its facility, at least three major oil spills, over 100 hazmat and odor incidents requiring the Newark Fire Department’s response, and thousands of complaints from the community to local authorities. If that wasn’t enough, in March 2011, a huge explosion at the Evergreen facility involving a hydrochloric acid tank and waste oil sent flames hundreds of feet into the air and nearly required an evacuation of the surrounding areas.

It’s understandable that local officials and the community want the jobs. But when it came to land use, local officials didn’t think much about the plant’s location. Evergreen operations are less than half a mile from a housing development. A former Newark City Manager, Alberto Huezo, put it like this to the Oakland Tribune: “This goes back to the fact that it’s an industry we desperately need. But it was put in the wrong place-and the neighbors were there first.”

An alphabet soup of state and local regulators has authority over Evergreen. It has permits for hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal, air quality, waste water and more. But all these regulators seem to be leaving it to the next guy to figure out what went wrong and who’s responsible for enforcement. There are some boots on the ground investigating, but nothing is bubbling to the surface yet.

The Department of Toxic Substances Control should step in as the lead regulator. Evergreen is a hazardous waste plant, after all. But the department says its permit exempts from regulation the part of Evergreen’s plant involving certified recycled oil since it is no longer considered a “hazardous material.” That’s the part of the plant where the leak allegedly occurred. Never mind that recycled oil still contains toxins. And what leaked wasn’t the oil anyway, it was a hazardous heat transfer chemical used in the refining process.

As the DTSC investigates its own authority to regulate, its first instinct should always be proactive and protective. Because when an Evergreen falls, it definitely gives off smells and sometimes much worse.

Timidity and Fragmented Oversight of Evergreen Oil Plant Hamper Enforcement, Endanger Community, Says Group

New information obtained from emergency responders shows that a July 6th high-temperature leak at the Evergreen Oil re-refining plant in Newark, California involved a hazardous industrial chemical, not just recycled motor oil, as initially reported. Consumer Watchdog called on the chief regulator of the facility to shut the plant down. In a letter sent Tuesday to Debbie Raphael, Director of the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the consumer organization asked her to convene fragmented regulatory agencies and respond strongly to the latest in a long series of safety violations and accidents at the plant in Newark, CA.

According to Consumer Watchdog, regulators are unclear about who is the lead regulator overseeing the facility, with DTSC’s own enforcers acknowledging they are uncertain of the department’s authority over the whole plant, which processes used motor oil. They were also not aware of what actions other agencies might be taking.

“The DTSC, which should be the leader in any event involving this serial safety violator, seems almost to be looking for reasons not to get involved,” said Consumer Watchdog advocate Liza Tucker. “This is an opportunity for the new director to show strong leadership and creativity in a department that appears to have faltered for years.”

The letter sent Tuesday said in part:

“Such holes in oversight must be filled for the safety of all Californians.  Rather than parsing its ability to regulate this portion and not that portion of a toxic waste plant, the DTSC should put itself at the forefront of saying that this is one dangerous accident too many….. ”

“On its face, the idea that the DTSC would have authority to regulate one part of a hazardous waste plant but not another is absurd, particularly when the release on July 6 was hazardous enough to warrant an evacuation, whether the dangerous leak was in the re-refinery area of the plant or not. ”

Download the entire letter here with a timeline of events

On July 6, a pipe leak spewed a hazardous vapor filled with “heat transfer” chemicals used in re-refining. That  triggered an emergency evacuation of the facility.  The company and Newark police warned the surrounding community, including a nearby elementary school, to expect a wave of “strong chemical odors” from the leak.

See link to CAL-EMA public record of initial report here.

The DTSC said that the leak on July 6 took place in a portion of Evergreen’s facility where recycled oil is processed.  A DTSC official stated that the department’s hands are tied because the permit issued to Evergreen does not cover the part of the facility where the leak occurred. According to DTSC, once the waste oil has been partially treated, it is no longer considered a “hazard.”  But the heat transfer liquid used to control refining temperatures is hazardous, according to the Alameda County Health and Environmental Agency.

“Evergreen’s long history of repeated and serious safety violations has to come to an end,” said Tucker. “The department has to take control of the situation, including coordination with other regulators, for the sake of the community surrounding the Evergreen plant, and to set an example for all Californians.”

The July 6 accident markeds the latest in a string of problems at the plant that includes a burst pipe and major fire in March 2011 and repeated citations by the DTSC for safety violations and carelessness.  Yet the DTSC has let the company off the hook with consent decrees and hand-slap fines for at least a dozen years, said Consumer Watchdog.  The group said now is the opportune time for new leadership at the DTSC to rethink its approach to regulating hazardous waste and recycling facilities.

Click here for more.

Read Consumer Watchdog’s July 16 letter to DTSC Director Debbie Raphael here.

Also read Consumer Watchdog’s April 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee.  

State Department of toxic Substances Control Must Send “Strong Message” to Evergreen Oil Re-Refiner Over Repeated Safety Lapses, Accidents

Consumer Watchdog called on the Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Debbie Raphael, to indefinitely close the Evergreen Oil waste-oil re-refinery in Newark, Ca. in a letter sent today. On July 6, a pipe leak spewed “superheated oil” and triggered an emergency evacuation of the facility. The company and Newark police warned the surrounding community, including a nearby elementary school, to expect a wave of “strong odors” from the leak.

Read today’s letter to Raphael here

Consumer Watchdog cited repeated problems at the facility as an example of DTSC’s failure to take tough action against toxic industries that continue to operate after repeated safety violations near homes and schools in testimony and a letter presented at Debbie Raphael’s State Senate confirmation hearings in April.

The confirmation letter said several companies, including Evergreen, “appear to have manipulated or ignored the DTSC and other agencies to the detriment of concerned and frustrated local residents.”

The accident marks the latest in a string of problems at the plant that re-refines used motor oil, including a burst pipe and major fire in March 2011 and repeated citations by the DTSC for safety violations and carelessness.

<!–more–>

“Consumer Watchdog is appalled to learn of yet another accident at the Newark-based used oil recycler Evergreen Oil,” said Liza Tucker, an advocate at Consumer Watchdog. “We call on the DTSC to shut this refinery down indefinitely. Evergreen needs to know that sloppy safety procedures, and refusal to fix or replace shoddy infrastructure, is simply unacceptable.”

The DTSC has let the company off the hook with consent decrees and hand-slap fines for at least a dozen years, said Consumer Watchdog. The group called for the new leadership at the DTSC to send toxic industries a strong message that there is a new sheriff in town who won’t allow careless endangerment.

The letter sent today to Director Raphael said in part:

“Your department has repeatedly cited Evergreen Oil for cracks and gaps in waste container storage and transfer areas, failing to track contaminated petroleum waste coming in and out of the facility, careless soil contamination, and omissions in its own inspection system.

“Still, the DTSC fined this company that generates some $36 million in annual revenues less than $60,000 under six separate consent decrees between 2006 and 2011. This practice of accepting promises that Evergreen will police itself, instead of taking the company to court, has been an abject failure. The DTSC has cited the company for failure to follow even its own simple safety procedures.

“At the same time, members of the local community say that for 25 years Evergreen has ignored federal and state laws and polluted their neighborhoods.”

The department has a special responsibility to working and middle class families in the small cities where companies produce and recycle toxics including PCBs, dioxin, and heavy metals near homes and schools, Consumer Watchdog said. Too many of these companies have mastered the arts of delay to avoid fixing leaks, improving infrastructure, and following adequate internal safety controls.

“Evergreen Oil has proven repeatedly that it cannot be trusted,” said Tucker. “The DTSC and other regulators need to put community safety first and show zero tolerance for such polluters.”

Consumer Watchdog has previously described problems at several hazardous waste sites, and also called for reforms at the DTSC to address a lack of transparency, a disconnect between inspection and enforcement, and a preference for weak settlements instead of more aggressive prosecution of serial violators.

Read Letter to Director Raphael

Also read Consumer Watchdog’s April 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee

State Department of toxic Substances Control Must Send “Strong Message” to Evergreen Oil Re-Refiner Over Repeated Safety Lapses, Accidents

Consumer Watchdog called on the Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Debbie Raphael, to indefinitely close the Evergreen Oil waste-oil re-refinery in Newark, Ca. in a letter sent today.  On July 6, a pipe leak spewed “superheated oil” and triggered an emergency evacuation of the facility.  The company and Newark police warned the surrounding community, including a nearby elementary school, to expect a wave of “strong odors” from the leak.

Read today’s letter to Raphael here

Consumer Watchdog cited repeated problems at the facility as an example of DTSC’s failure to take tough action against toxic industries that continue to operate after repeated safety violations near homes and schools in testimony and a letter presented at Debbie Raphael’s State Senate confirmation hearings in April.

The confirmation letter said several companies, including Evergreen, “appear to have manipulated or ignored the DTSC and other agencies to the detriment of concerned and frustrated local residents.”

The accident marks the latest in a string of problems at the plant that re-refines used motor oil, including a burst pipe and major fire in March 2011 and repeated citations by the DTSC for safety violations and carelessness.

“Consumer Watchdog is appalled to learn of yet another accident at the Newark-based used oil recycler Evergreen Oil,” said Liza Tucker, an advocate at Consumer Watchdog.  “We call on the DTSC to shut this refinery down indefinitely.   Evergreen needs to know that sloppy safety procedures, and refusal to fix or replace shoddy infrastructure, is simply unacceptable.”

The DTSC has let the company off the hook with consent decrees and hand-slap fines for at least a dozen years, said Consumer Watchdog.  The group called for the new leadership at the DTSC to send toxic industries a strong message that there is a new sheriff in town who won’t allow careless endangerment.

The letter sent today to Director Raphael said in part:

“Your department has repeatedly cited Evergreen Oil for cracks and gaps in waste container storage and transfer areas, failing to track contaminated petroleum waste coming in and out of the facility, careless soil contamination, and omissions in its own inspection system.

“Still, the DTSC fined this company that generates some $36 million in annual revenues less than $60,000 under six separate consent decrees between 2006 and 2011.  This practice of accepting promises that Evergreen will police itself, instead of taking the company to court, has been an abject failure. The DTSC has cited the company for failure to follow even its own simple safety procedures.

“At the same time, members of the local community say that for 25 years Evergreen has ignored federal and state laws and polluted their neighborhoods.”

The department has a special responsibility to working and middle class families in the small cities where companies produce and recycle toxics including PCBs, dioxin, and heavy metals near homes and schools, Consumer Watchdog said.  Too many of these companies have mastered the arts of delay to avoid fixing leaks, improving infrastructure, and following adequate internal safety controls.

“Evergreen Oil has proven repeatedly that it cannot be trusted,” said Tucker.  “The DTSC and other regulators need to put community safety first and show zero tolerance for such polluters.”

Consumer Watchdog has previously described problems at several hazardous waste sites, and also called for reforms at the DTSC to address a lack of transparency, a disconnect between inspection and enforcement, and a preference for weak settlements instead of more aggressive prosecution of serial violators.

Read Letter to Director Raphael

Also read Consumer Watchdog’s April 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee

– 30 –

State Department of toxic Substances Control Must Send “Strong Message” to Evergreen Oil Re-Refiner Over Repeated Safety Lapses, Accidents

Consumer Watchdog called on the Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Debbie Raphael, to indefinitely close the Evergreen Oil waste-oil re-refinery in Newark, Ca. in a letter sent today.  On July 6, a pipe leak spewed “superheated oil” and triggered an emergency evacuation of the facility.  The company and Newark police warned the surrounding community, including a nearby elementary school, to expect a wave of “strong odors” from the leak.

Read today’s letter to Raphael here

Consumer Watchdog cited repeated problems at the facility as an example of DTSC’s failure to take tough action against toxic industries that continue to operate after repeated safety violations near homes and schools in testimony and a letter presented at Debbie Raphael’s State Senate confirmation hearings in April.

The confirmation letter said several companies, including Evergreen, “appear to have manipulated or ignored the DTSC and other agencies to the detriment of concerned and frustrated local residents.”

The accident marks the latest in a string of problems at the plant that re-refines used motor oil, including a burst pipe and major fire in March 2011 and repeated citations by the DTSC for safety violations and carelessness.

“Consumer Watchdog is appalled to learn of yet another accident at the Newark-based used oil recycler Evergreen Oil,” said Liza Tucker, an advocate at Consumer Watchdog.  “We call on the DTSC to shut this refinery down indefinitely.   Evergreen needs to know that sloppy safety procedures, and refusal to fix or replace shoddy infrastructure, is simply unacceptable.”

The DTSC has let the company off the hook with consent decrees and hand-slap fines for at least a dozen years, said Consumer Watchdog.  The group called for the new leadership at the DTSC to send toxic industries a strong message that there is a new sheriff in town who won’t allow careless endangerment.

The letter sent today to Director Raphael said in part:

“Your department has repeatedly cited Evergreen Oil for cracks and gaps in waste container storage and transfer areas, failing to track contaminated petroleum waste coming in and out of the facility, careless soil contamination, and omissions in its own inspection system.

“Still, the DTSC fined this company that generates some $36 million in annual revenues less than $60,000 under six separate consent decrees between 2006 and 2011.  This practice of accepting promises that Evergreen will police itself, instead of taking the company to court, has been an abject failure. The DTSC has cited the company for failure to follow even its own simple safety procedures.

“At the same time, members of the local community say that for 25 years Evergreen has ignored federal and state laws and polluted their neighborhoods.”

The department has a special responsibility to working and middle class families in the small cities where companies produce and recycle toxics including PCBs, dioxin, and heavy metals near homes and schools, Consumer Watchdog said.  Too many of these companies have mastered the arts of delay to avoid fixing leaks, improving infrastructure, and following adequate internal safety controls.

“Evergreen Oil has proven repeatedly that it cannot be trusted,” said Tucker.  “The DTSC and other regulators need to put community safety first and show zero tolerance for such polluters.”

Consumer Watchdog has previously described problems at several hazardous waste sites, and also called for reforms at the DTSC to address a lack of transparency, a disconnect between inspection and enforcement, and a preference for weak settlements instead of more aggressive prosecution of serial violators.

Read Letter to Director Raphael

Also read Consumer Watchdog’s April 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee

– 30 –

State Department of toxic Substances Control Must Send “Strong Message” to Evergreen Oil Re-Refiner Over Repeated Safety Lapses, Accidents

Consumer Watchdog called on the Director of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Debbie Raphael, to indefinitely close the Evergreen Oil waste-oil re-refinery in Newark, Ca. in a letter sent today.  On July 6, a pipe leak spewed “superheated oil” and triggered an emergency evacuation of the facility.  The company and Newark police warned the surrounding community, including a nearby elementary school, to expect a wave of “strong odors” from the leak.

Read today’s letter to Raphael here

Consumer Watchdog cited repeated problems at the facility as an example of DTSC’s failure to take tough action against toxic industries that continue to operate after repeated safety violations near homes and schools in testimony and a letter presented at Debbie Raphael’s State Senate confirmation hearings in April.

The confirmation letter said several companies, including Evergreen, “appear to have manipulated or ignored the DTSC and other agencies to the detriment of concerned and frustrated local residents.”

The accident marks the latest in a string of problems at the plant that re-refines used motor oil, including a burst pipe and major fire in March 2011 and repeated citations by the DTSC for safety violations and carelessness.

“Consumer Watchdog is appalled to learn of yet another accident at the Newark-based used oil recycler Evergreen Oil,” said Liza Tucker, an advocate at Consumer Watchdog.  “We call on the DTSC to shut this refinery down indefinitely.   Evergreen needs to know that sloppy safety procedures, and refusal to fix or replace shoddy infrastructure, is simply unacceptable.”

The DTSC has let the company off the hook with consent decrees and hand-slap fines for at least a dozen years, said Consumer Watchdog.  The group called for the new leadership at the DTSC to send toxic industries a strong message that there is a new sheriff in town who won’t allow careless endangerment.

The letter sent today to Director Raphael said in part:

“Your department has repeatedly cited Evergreen Oil for cracks and gaps in waste container storage and transfer areas, failing to track contaminated petroleum waste coming in and out of the facility, careless soil contamination, and omissions in its own inspection system.

“Still, the DTSC fined this company that generates some $36 million in annual revenues less than $60,000 under six separate consent decrees between 2006 and 2011.  This practice of accepting promises that Evergreen will police itself, instead of taking the company to court, has been an abject failure. The DTSC has cited the company for failure to follow even its own simple safety procedures.

“At the same time, members of the local community say that for 25 years Evergreen has ignored federal and state laws and polluted their neighborhoods.”

The department has a special responsibility to working and middle class families in the small cities where companies produce and recycle toxics including PCBs, dioxin, and heavy metals near homes and schools, Consumer Watchdog said.  Too many of these companies have mastered the arts of delay to avoid fixing leaks, improving infrastructure, and following adequate internal safety controls.

“Evergreen Oil has proven repeatedly that it cannot be trusted,” said Tucker.  “The DTSC and other regulators need to put community safety first and show zero tolerance for such polluters.”

Consumer Watchdog has previously described problems at several hazardous waste sites, and also called for reforms at the DTSC to address a lack of transparency, a disconnect between inspection and enforcement, and a preference for weak settlements instead of more aggressive prosecution of serial violators.

Read Letter to Director Raphael

Also read Consumer Watchdog’s April 9 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee

– 30 –

Fracking for natural gas is perceived as an issue east of the Rocky Mountains – Texas, North Dakota, and the Marcellus Shale. California runs on natural gas and hydropower. Fracking is happening in California, but it’s a secret.

How much of a secret? The state literally doesn’t know:

Its actual words were: “The Division is unable to identify where and how often hydraulic fracturing occurs within the state.” It also said that “the Division has not yet developed regulations to address this activity.”

A February 2012 report (PDF) by the Environmental Working Group found that the state has long turned a blind eye to fracking. Its regulators have simply asked the frackers, nicely, to make voluntary disclosures. In Ventura County, the voluntary disclosures show that one well has been fracked, but the state estimates that virtually all of the 240 wells in a local field have been fracked.

The state is planning a new set of regulations. For now, it’s wiped its website clean of fracking information. It’s holding workshops up and down the state, ostensibly to listen to the concerns of Californians before crafting new regulations.

I attended the one of the first workshops, held on May 30 in Ventura. A reporter estimated 175 people in attendance; I counted about 25 speakers in opposition to some degree (mostly calling for a ban), and 3 people (all involved in the industry) favoring fracking. By an interesting coincidence, every person who specified a desired regulation was asked to submit comments in writing, but every person who opposed fracking entirely was simply thanked with a pained smile and glazed eyes.

A Culver City workshop on June 12 had an even stronger response: the standing room only crowd of several hundred wanted a total ban. In Salinas on June 29, the strawberry growers’ industry – not normally perceived as environmentally friendly – joined with greens to query fracking safety.  A Santa Maria workshop will take place tonight, with the final workshop July 25 in Sacramento.

There’s a lot of reasons why fracking anywhere is a bad idea. There’s a lot more specific reasons why a water-intensive process that may cause earthquakes is a bad idea in California. California has showcased alternatives, from distributed generation (rooftop) solar to massive desert solar. People who show up at workshops are speaking. Are the regulators listening?