|
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
| Learn about Flint Hills Resources' pollution prevention efforts and how you too can make a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health Risks and Safety Concerns
On an average day, the FHR Pine Bend refinery emits about 22 tons of pollutants to the air, water and land from
hundreds of thousands of release points. The refinery also uses about 12 million gallons a day of crude oil,
and stores hundreds of millions of gallons of crude oil, petroleum products and intermediates and other chemicals
used to process crude oil. People living near the refinery have asked:
- What's my health risk from these emissions?
and
- What's my risk if an accident, such as a fire or an explosion, should occur at the refinery?
Health Risks
The process of defining and measuring human health "risk" is very complex. The process of estimating health risk is
done by professionals, known as "risk assessors," and involves the following steps:
- Determine what hazards are associated with the chemicals released from a facility;
- Determine how much of a chemical is actually absorbed or ingested into the body for a variety of individuals and estimate the number of individuals exposed to the chemicals;
- Determine the potential for health effects at different exposure levels for each chemical released (often this information is based on laboratory studies); and
- Combine all the above information to calculate a "risk probability"
This method provides a range of numbers that represents the probability that a person could have health effects
from chemical emissions released by a facility. Because risk assessors use hundreds of different factors to
calculate an individual's or populations health risk from chemical emissions, they use computer models to calculate
the "risk probability". A good resource for more information on risk is
EPA's "A Citizen's Guide to Risk
Assessment".
Health Risk Assessment for the Pine Bend Refinery
In 1997, FHR completed a health risk assessment that analyzed air emissions from the refinery using the most
current data available at the time from the MPCA. Data collected from three air monitors located at different
points around the perimeter of the refinery served as the basis for evaluating air quality. However, for some
chemicals (for example, hexane) impacts were based on computer models used to estimate chemical concentrations
in the air when real data was not available.
The HRA was performed under the guidance of a 20-member Task Force, including representatives of the University
of Minnesota School of Public Health, the Minnesota Department of Health, elected officials from the surrounding
communities, local residents, union workers and FHR environmental staff.
The HRA analyzed both cancer and other non-cancer human health effects. It did not evaluate impacts to plants,
animals or the environment in general. The HRA found that the potential cancer risk was coming mostly from three
chemicals - chromium, tetrachloroethene, and benzene. For non-cancer health effects, the HRA found that hexane,
barium, hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen chloride accounted for most of the potential risk. In addition, it found that,
for children, mercury accounted for most of the potential risk.
The HRA concluded that "[a]ir emissions from Koch Refining Company's (Koch) Pine Bend refinery at Rosemount,
Minnesota do not pose a health risk to the public above the guidelines established by the Minnesota Department of
Health." (Find out more about MDH guidelines here,
or the MPCA's air toxics program here.)
If you would like to receive a copy of the complete health risk assessment,
please Contact us.
Toxicity of Chemicals Released:
Although FHR did reduce total emissions to the environment by 50% by the end of 2004, how did the toxicity of those emissions change? Over the fiveyear emission reduction initiative, toxicity did decrease. This was determined by calculating a risk profile for the air emissions from the Pine Bend refinery using the methodologies of three different organizations: the U.S. EPA, Environmental Defense (ED) and Imperial Chemical Industries' (ICI) Environmental Burden System. According to each method, the total amount, in pounds, of TRI chemicals emitted into the air was multiplied by a "weighting factor;" this factor varied with each method, thus resulting in differing outcomes. In comparison to the 1997 baseline year data, the toxicity of air emissions released by the refinery, according to 2004 data, are calculated as follows:
- using the USEPA method, toxicity of air emissions decreased by 62%
- using the ED method, toxicity of air emissions decreased by 41%
- using the ICI method, toxicity of air emissions decreased by 63%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As noted above, toxicity of emissions decreased over the five years of the Emission Reduction Initiative. Flint Hills Resources has eliminated most of the chromium used at the refinery (in cooling towers, for example, Flint Hills Resources switched to a phosphorus based corrosion control program), eliminated tetrachloroethene (using water based cleaners instead of the chlorinated solvents) and reduced benzene and barium emissions. Flint Hills also reduced hydrogen chloride emissions by adding scrubbers on the reformers.
Flint Hills Resources is also participating in a voluntary mercury reduction plan with the MPCA to understand the sources and emissions of mercury and to reduce, where possible, those emissions. As it does projects around the refinery, Flint Hills has been removing equipment containing mercury and replacing it with non-mercury equipment.< |
|
MCEA is pleased to see a trend showing a decrease in the amount of toxic chemicals released. We encourage continued reduction in emissions of the most toxic compounds, such as benzene, mercury and lead.
Flint Hills Resources' 1997 Health Risk Assessment (HRA) does not answer all questions about potential health risks posed by the refinery. The HRA only analyzed air emissions. It did not analyze health risks associated with emissions to other media, for example, groundwater or surface water. Moreover, as for air emissions, the HRA only examined potential long-term health effects; it did not examine potential short-term health effects, nor did it examine the potential health impacts that could arise due to exposure from the mixture of chemicals that might be found in the air in the Pine Bend area. (Rarely is a person exposed to just one chemical at a time, but instead people breathe in a complex mixture of chemicals—and there is limited data available on the additive or synergistic effects of chemicals on the human body.) Also, it is important to recognize that the Flint Hills Resources HRA was specifically limited to only the air emissions coming from the refinery; it was not a complete look at all sources of pollution in the Pine Bend area.
As a result, the HRA left some local residents feeling less than fully satisfied. As one resident put it:
It may be all well and good that the Pollution Control Agency and Flint Hills Resources are now telling me that air emissions from the refinery don’t pose a health threat; but frankly, I don’t care where the pollution is coming from—as a resident of the Pine Bend area, I just want to know if I’m safe. Can you tell me that?
Of course the answer was “no.” This is because HRA’s generally analyze the potential health impacts of emissions from one particular facility. Regulators and policy makers review each HRA independently when making decisions.
MCEA believes a far better indicator of health risk would be to analyze a whole geographic area; for instance, known “hot spot” areas where exceedances of environmental standards have occurred. Using a holistic approach, emissions from all of the facilities located in a particular area would be analyzed in order to assess potential human health impacts in a more complete manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
