WHAT AM I MISSING HERE? Are Benicians just kittens in a burlap sack, down by the riverside, resigned to the inevitable?
Let’s see if I’ve got this right. (a) We’re in earthquake country (see evidence of the Green Valley fault in terrain on the way to Cordelia); (b) We’re next to fragile wetlands (for spectacular views, click Google Maps/Benicia, hybrid setting, find rail line and follow to Sacramento); (c) We’re contiguous with an important commercial waterway; (d) We host an outfit whose headquarters has fought attempts to safeguard our environment (see Valero Energy Corporation’s position and funding regarding Proposition 23); (e) A local outfit, under direction from its far-off headquarters, plans to process a dangerous, toxic product; (f) The outfit is served by a rail system with a recent history of tank car derailment; (g) Parts of this railroad system (built by Central Pacific RR in 1877), running through marshland to the Carquinez Strait, repeatedly sank into unstable marshy terrain, requiring hundreds of thousands of tons of rock, gravel and other materials to stabilize it; (h) Other parts of the antique rail infrastructure seem poorly maintained and may be unsafe, e.g., the Benicia-Martinez rail bridge, built between 1928 and 1930 for Southern Pacific RR to replace the train ferry to Port Costa; (i) Old tank cars are a problem — an area newspaper reports that BNSF railway officials told federal regulators in March of concerns that older, less robust tank cars will end up transporting crude oil because of Canadian rail pricing policies; (j) Emergency responders are unprepared to handle spills or fires in the event of derailment of cars headed to any of five Bay Area refineries. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, after listening to testimony from emergency responders, said, “There is a potential for very serious problems and very disastrous problems.” Chief of the Contra Costa Fire District is quoted saying, “… with the sheer volume that will be coming in, we are going to see more accidents.” The 2007-08 Solano County Grand Jury, after investigating the county’s fire districts, reports a general need for more funding, heavy dependence on dedicated volunteers and the preponderance of old fire trucks, while noting the high cost of HAZMAT suits and problems with communications caused by incompatible equipment and radio frequencies.
And yet, despite this unbelievably horrific backdrop, certain elements in town warn us to hush lest Valero be forced out of the competitive (i.e., tar sands crude) market, destroying its “desire to remain in Benicia.”
Clearly, Valero Benicia Refinery cannot be faulted for all of the foregoing. Good workers deserve good jobs; they should be able to tell their grandkids they helped, rather than harmed, the environment. Valero Benicia is just one of many links in a chain of factors that could lead to the disaster so many in this community fear.
Am I “agenda driven” as charged? Bet your raggedy backside I am. My agenda involves doing homework to find threats to my home, my town, my state and my nation, and advising others of my findings (just in case they might care). If you detect it, yell “GAS” to alert the rest of the platoon; then put on your mask, while you can still breathe.
For a glimmer of the scope of Big Oil’s operations from sea to shining sea and beyond, see the astounding number of outfits similar to Valero Energy Corp. in the U.S and Canada. Find ’em in Wikipedia (“independent oil companies — Americas”). Select a company to see its history of oil spills. Wonder why the Keystone XL pipeline is planned to extend to Texas? Check out which corporations own the pipeline and the benefits associated with Foreign Trade Zones (32 FTZ in Texas compared to 17 in California, and 15 in New York).
If folks look around a bit they may discover that Big Oil, like Big Coal and other corporate behemoths, extends powerful influence throughout the land of the free and the home of the brave. Many were hoodwinked by Operation Iraqi Liberation, in which Big Oil colluded with Big Government to achieve absolute power of life and death over us and our enemy — the one with phantom WMDs and a vast, very real amount of oil.
Is this really adios, Pilgrim? — or just “I double-dog dare you”? I don’t believe it’s Valero’s style to leave town. It’s not in the corporation’s best interests and shouldn’t be its preferred option.
What are those options? They include:
Option 1. Stay put, but back away from risky tar sands crude and focus on products involving minimum environmental risk. Backing away for good business reasons is not the same as “backing down.” CVS decided to stop selling cigarettes. The firm considered it “the right thing to do for the good of our customers and our company. The sale of tobacco products is inconsistent with our purpose — helping people on their path to better health.” Barrons online says, “We think that CVS — like anyone who quits smoking — is making a good long-term decision, even if it makes things rough short-term.” Others consider it a PR coup! CVS gained the respect of millions of customers for what is perceived as a moral and ethical decision. I shop CVS more often since they made that brilliant call; so do my friends.
Backing away from tar sands crude would take similar corporate guts; but the public would be pleased with the image of a moral, ethical, highly principled corporation — a Valero that gives a damn. Sales at Valero service stations might even increase.
Option 2. Continue to pursue tar sands crude; seeking high profitability despite increased environmental risk. The downside: prices at the pump are too high. Californians are already angry; they may avoid Valero service stations and products. I’ll urge my friends to do so. Word of mouth is powerful and spreads quickly. Contempt for an outfit that doesn’t respect its customers or our environment could lead to loss of sales in the country’s most populous state. Cesar Chavez showed us boycotts work. Most folks I know didn’t buy grapes.
Option 3. “Re-purpose” Valero’s operations in Benicia (and elsewhere) to enhance instead of degrade the environment while remaining profitable. Valero is an energy outfit. Turning to alternate sources of energy is ultimately inevitable. Valero should expand its vision and not limit itself to fossil fuels. Farmers in Ireland who grew only potatoes learned about diversification too late.
(a) Pursue wind farming if feasible and profitable. A recent Mother Earth News article about mountaintop removal coal mining in Appalachia cites a 2007 study that determined placing wind turbines on Coal River Mountain would provide power to 70,000 West Virginia homes while generating $1.7 million in local taxes each year. Better than ripping off the tops of mountains and dumping enormous amounts of debris into streams and rivers.
(b) Pursue solar energy if feasible and profitable. Produce solar products for sale and/or operate a solar power facility to resell power. See an article by Don Hofmann, president of RegenEn Solar LLC, looking at mountaintop removal mining and suggesting solar power instead. He recognizes there are challenges but is optimistic about lower-cost solar cells and technology in the future. He notes that the U.S. fossil fuel industry received $72 billion in subsidies from 2002 to 2006 and asks us to imagine that kind of money put into solar development.
(c) Pursue other approaches (geothermal, tidal, et al.) if appropriate and profitable.
Option 4. Determine feasibility of combining 3a, 3b and/or 3c. If appropriate and profitable, pursue the combination.
Option 1 would be the easiest and would be enthusiastically supported by most folks in Benicia, applauded by most Californians and recognized as a principled business decision.
Option 2 is the least desirable from an environmental standpoint. While profitability is high, it may incur the contempt and wrath of the public, possibly leading to damaging boycotts and a decline in profitability.
Option 3a thru 3c may seem starry-eyed, wild and outside the box. They would require imagination, foresight and courage. It can be done. CVS is showing the way and TESLA is succeeding with electrically powered cars. Examine pluses and minuses — Valero could take a quantum leap and be regarded as an industry trailblazer. Its reputation would be enhanced. Envious competitors might scoff and want Valero to take a pratfall but ultimately they would have to follow suit.
In conclusion the priority order of Valero’s options should be:
Option 1 — Most desirable (preferred)
Option 3/4 — Most “outside the box” (defer initially, but plan for the future)
Option 2 — Least desirable (avoid).
If Valero is really in the long-term energy game, it should choose Option 1 and start thinking seriously about Option 3. If, instead, its focus is on short term — high profits while risking irreparable harm to the environment — then Option 2 is their ticket.
If Valero wants to be recognized as rich, principled, brave and famous instead of rich, unscrupulous and infamous, then it should open door No. 3 as soon as possible.
Finally: I don’t believe it is “adios” for Valero Benicia Refinery. Unfortunately, I think Valero will not choose a clean path. They will probably press on with dirty tar sands crude. After that, “¿Quien sabe?”
I don’t intend to “go gentle into that good night.” Instead I prefer to “rage against the dying of the light.”
This whole thing could be like a colonoscopy, but a lot less fun.
Joel Fallon is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
What a refreshing perspective – thank you, Joel. As a fellow “sometimes poet,” I particularly appreciated your concluding reference to Dylan Thomas’ “Do not go gently into that good night.” My own reaction to Valero’s deadly proposal started out gently: I hoped we could persuade the City to require an Environmental Impact Report. Somewhere along the way, I realized that we should simply STOP this nonsense “in its tracks.” Our quest has turned into a firm conviction and a rousing effort. I surely hope that our City leaders have made a similar turn in their opinion. The Planning Commission can stop this proposal one way or another. And if Valero looks to the City Council for approval, our elected representatives can and should stop it. City staff is obligated to serve Valero as it would any other business seeking approval, but I believe that staff also wants to serve the interests of common citizens like you and me who care deeply, not only about our own town’s safety, but the well-being of those uprail and downwind of Benicia and the folks and critters where tar sands crude and Bakken crude are mined.
Others reading this can join in the effort to Stop Crude By Rail by visiting http://www.SafeBenicia.org or on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/stopcrudebyrail. Benicians for a Safe and Healthy Benicia is the organization – YOU are the voice and the power!
More crude-by-rail news the community can use–
From the above article:
“Let’s see if I’ve got this right.”
“Emergency responders are unprepared to handle spills or fires in the event of derailment of cars headed to any of five Bay Area refineries. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, after listening to testimony from emergency responders, said, “There is a potential for very serious problems and very disastrous problems.” Chief of the Contra Costa Fire District is quoted saying, “… with the sheer volume that will be coming in, we are going to see more accidents.”
From the post below, more information for our elected leader past and present to consider…
“No Community is Prepared for Major Oil-By-Rail Accident, Senate Hearing Told”
“One of the main reasons no community is prepared for a worst-case oil-by-rail event is the loophole that exempts oil companies from needing comprehensive spill response plans in place. The NTSB has recommended this be changed, but regulators at the Department of Transportation aren’t moving to do so.”
‘There have been no changes made to improve safety beyond the industry’s promised voluntary ones — which they have already failed to live up to. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) said in a statement earlier this month.’
“Just last month before the Commerce Committee, the crude oil industry assured us they were focused on safety and willing to work on this issue. Since then, I’ve seen nothing to convince me this was more than just lip service.”
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/04/25/no-community-prepared-major-oil-rail-accident-senate-hearing-told
I don’t think it would be that difficult to build a containment system (primary and secondary) complete with a foam application system along the route starting at city limits. Restrict the trains to 3 to 5 mph also starting at city limits and have them escorted in by Refinery personel
More crude-by-rail news the community can use–
From the above article:
“Let’s see if I’ve got this right.”
“Emergency responders are unprepared to handle spills or fires in the event of derailment of cars headed to any of five Bay Area refineries. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, after listening to testimony from emergency responders, said, “There is a potential for very serious problems and very disastrous problems.” Chief of the Contra Costa Fire District is quoted saying, “… with the sheer volume that will be coming in, we are going to see more accidents.”
Beyond the naysayers…
From the post below, more information for our elected leader past and present to consider…
Breaking: CSX Railroad “Bomb Train” Carrying Crude Oil Explodes in Lynchburg, Virginia
Update, 4:45 PM EDT: Jenna Zibton of NBC’s local affiliate WSLS-10 has posted a photo of rail cars that have derailed and now have fallen into the James River up on Twitter.
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/04/30/breaking-csx-railroad-bomb-train-carrying-crude-oil-explodes-lynchburg-virginia
Sorry Will you never have it right.
More crude-by-rail news the community can use–
From the above article:
“Let’s see if I’ve got this right.”
“Emergency responders are unprepared to handle spills or fires in the event of derailment of cars headed to any of five Bay Area refineries. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, after listening to testimony from emergency responders, said, “There is a potential for very serious problems and very disastrous problems.” Chief of the Contra Costa Fire District is quoted saying, “… with the sheer volume that will be coming in, we are going to see more accidents.”
Beyond the naysayers…More about “getting it right.”
From the post below, more information for our elected leader past and present to consider…
“How This U.S. Rail Safety Measure Has Been Delayed for 44 Years … And Counting”
“So why hasn’t anything been done? Mostly because of opposition by oil and gas industry groups, such as the American Petroleum Institute (API). The API was a constant presence at last week’s rail safety forum, just as it has been at congressional hearings on rail safety this year. ”
“Basically, API is opposed to making changes to the rail tank cars because safety cuts into profits. Even NTSB Chairman Deborah Hersman pointed to the profit motive in an interview with NPR on April 25th. Hersman said, “Absolutely. Follow the money. It all comes back to the money.”
“And the reality is that API’s members don’t have to worry about paying for accidents caused by using these unsafe DOT-111 cars. The current estimate for what it will cost to clean up and rebuild from the oil train accident in Lac-Megantic, Que., is $2.7 billion, which will be paid by Canadian taxpayers, not by oil or rail companies.”
http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/04/30/how-u-s-rail-safety-measure-has-been-delayed-44-years-and-counting
see below. Again Will you never get it right. Now tell us about the rail cars Valero is ordering. Did you forget all about that. Will you belong to ther scare tactic group. Get it right. Accidents do happen.
More crude-by-rail news the community can use–
From the above article:
“Let’s see if I’ve got this right.”
“Emergency responders are unprepared to handle spills or fires in the event of derailment of cars headed to any of five Bay Area refineries. State Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, after listening to testimony from emergency responders, said, “There is a potential for very serious problems and very disastrous problems.” Chief of the Contra Costa Fire District is quoted saying, “… with the sheer volume that will be coming in, we are going to see more accidents.”
From the post below, more information for Mr. Fallon and our elected leader past and present to consider…
“Lack of information regarding the oil itself and its whereabouts can be multiplied across hundreds of towns and cities in North America. Randy Sawyer, the chief environmental health and hazardous materials officer for Contra Costa County in California, says the rail companies haven’t shared any information with his agency about when and where the oil will be moving. In the coming year, California expects to receive at least six oil trains per day, each carrying approximately 2.7 million gallons of crude oil, an increasing amount of it from the Bakken. Much of that could pass through Contra Costa County, which is home to four refineries and more than one million residents.”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/05/09/hazardous-cargo/
I agree with the writer and the followers they are agend driven anti fossil fuel. You are agenda driven as you say you are. On one hand you are a champion of Tesla on ine hand and on the other hand anti big oil which most of your followers say are only profit driven AND not safety and health first. You say Valero thinks profit first and that is bad and it also is not true. But on the other hand your renewable energy car maker Tesla it is ok to be profit driven. The CEO and founder could make a one billion haul yes I said one billion for him personally. That seems to be OK. You got your EIR you so desparately wanted but that is not enough. Your agenda driven ideals want to stop this project all together. So the delayed EIR {not expectrd in April} does not matter anymore. New safety regs do not matter. It is only your agenda driven anti fossil fuel motive that matters. Would you be satisfied if all EIR requirements are met? I think not. Just a very narrow stop it in its tracks approach. Very self serving even though all of you try to make it sound you care about all the residents. Apparently you do not. Many do not agree with your agenda dtriven ideals..Do you care about them? It appears the writer thinks he and his group have all the answers. Yes they do only if they suit their agenda driven ideals. I see no open minded resolutions coming from the anti fossil fuel group. Just one solution Stop it in its Tracks. That is not a solution it is an order with no solutions attached. Sorry I do not agree with the writer and his very narrow apprioach. Appears to be noble put is for sure agenda ideal driven. We shall see what happens as this goes thru the process.. I believe the EIR will address all the issues and all will be addressed and solved. I have seen no report from this group on what effect pipeline and tanker crude shipments have on this area. Are they exempt for now? Tell the readers the whole story that you have slightly indicated in the article. You want Valero to change and conform to meet your agenda driven ideals. Check them out further, you may be surprised what great things they are doing. This difference of opinions will go in and I do not disrespect others opinions just disagree. .
I ppreciate the options at the end of the detailed analysis, rather than black/white thinking. Especially proponents of the Valero project seem to think there is only one option – ram the project through, no matter what. Valero’s threat of leaving Benicia looks like coercion – politics as usual. – When the EIR comes out, we shall see how informed and involved the citizens of Benicia will be, on either side of the issue.
With all do respect this project is not just being rammed through. It is following all the proper procedures. It will go befor the planning commission with a possibility that the council will have the final say. I want this project approved but at the same time do understand that there are proper procedures to follow. As a long time resident of the Bay Area I have lived around refineries. When I moved to Benicia I knew there was a refinery here and had no problem with it being here. Valero has been a good neighbor hence the term Good Neighbor Committee. All Valero is asking for is a Three Rail Project on their proberty. There will be an EIR and the final decision will be mad3e after that is heard AND debated. But for the opponents to say they just want it stopped in its tracks are the ones that are trying to ram thru an outcome that will suit them. It is not the proponents.. The proponents are following the procedures and will abide by the out come. That is not what the opponents want. Just Stop it in its Tracks.. The proponents do have blACK/white thinking they hAVE
last sentence should read opponents have black/white thinking that is agenda driven. By the way J Furlong you may want to ask the EU what they are now going to do if Russia cuts them off of fossil fuel. You also may want to check the subsidies that renewable energy gets. It may well open your eyes or surprise you.
Bob – haven’t checked the EU (although I do know that Germany now gets the bulk of its energy, outside of vehicles, from solar), but the most recent comparison I could find, published in Forbes in 2013, looked at this issue over a long period of time and concluded that between 1994 and 2009 the U.S. oil and gas industries received a cumulative $446.96 billion in subsidies, compared to just $5.93 billion given to renewables in those years. I’m sure renewables get more now, but I would suspect that the ratio is still overwhelmingly skewed toward petroleum. Would be happy to look at other sources if you can provide.
Jfurlong stated:although I do know that Germany now gets the bulk of its energy, outside of vehicles, from solar
I would welcome to see a source on that. Here are two that offer differing numbers:
Already, 25 percent of German energy comes from renewable resources, but that advance has come at a cost to consumers, who have borne the brunt of the surcharges that funded the expansion .
Energy prices have risen each year since 2000 to among the highest in Europe, and the policy could lose its popular support if the prices continue to rise.
Source: NY Times April 2014
Gross electricity production, total 633.6 (Billion kWh) 100%
Lignite (coal) 162.0 (Bkwh) 25.6%
Nuclear energy 97.3 (Bkwh) 15.4%
Hard coal 124.0 (Bkwh) 19.6%
Natural gas 66.8 (Bkwh) 10.5%
Mineral oil products 6.4 (Bkwh) 1.0%
All Renewable energy sources 151.7 (Bkwh) 23.9%
Source:Dstatis
Dennis that is correct but the fact that they still get 37% from petroleum is driven by autos etc. America is still the leader in renewable energy. I was just trying to make a point that America doesw invest in renewable energy and that we are not behind other very large nations.
black/white thinking. Especially proponents of the Valero project seem to think there is only one option – ram the project through, no matter what.
Hmmm, sometimes one sees what they want to see, while perceptions cloud issues having become misperceptions.
I too have seen a lot of black and white thinking on this one and my perception is that it is on the side of those who are opposed to this project. Those opposed to this project are generally opposed to any project that may benefit the oil industry, as there is a deeply embedded mistrust of the industry by this same group of people.
Consider this:
Had Valero chosen to bring in tar sands, or Bakken crude by ship, which is entirely possible, none of these discussions nor any EIR would even be in consideration.
The added costs and delays as a result of these actions will be reflected in the price at the pump, that is a given.
Does that mean opponents should roll over and play dead? Of course not. But there needs to be a fair and reasonable analysis made, while avoiding a long drawn out ‘keystone’ type process.
But fair and reasonable is rarely seen when it comes to any project with even a slim possibility of benefiting the evil oil companies.
My personal concern is not centered on Valero, although I do find their “safety is our first consideration” a bit disingenuous, given the history of all corporations in this country. I am concerned about the state of our railroads (which, thanks again to our obsession with gas and gas-driven vehicles are in deplorable condition) and how the lack of safe, modern and strong tank cars, as well as neglected tracks present a huge problem in this area. I am scared to death of the picture of 100+ cars a day, lumbering into Benicia on substandard track, dragging substandard tank cars full of highly flammable and toxic oil. Unless and until Valero, and other oil companies who want to take advantage of this questionable energy douce, devote their immense political clout toward getting the railroads in a modern and safe condition, the possibility of another horrific accident, as seen in Canada and ND is not and “if,” it’s a “when.” Going by ship is also problematic (see Exxon Valdez), but since that horrific spill, tankers are equipped most often with double hulls, which we can’t say for railway tank cars.
sorry – darn autocorrect – questionable energy SOURCE!
J if you were at the meeting at the union hall you would have heard about the Valero railcars they ordered. Believe me they are not the cars currently used to ship crude by trail. Yes Valero is about safety and health then if possible profit will follow. A fact statement about Valero locally.Also where did you get your info on neglected rail tracks present a huge problem in our area. I would like to see that source. You could be correct but I am concerned about statements that many make that could be considered scare tactics. It does not appear you do that but at the same time it would be very helpful for your cause to give us the facts on the area rail tracks. Remember there are a lot of “ifs” and no facts to back those “ifs”. You may have them. Also do not be confused with tax issues and direct subsidies. There is a difference. Will get back to you with more info. Like the conversation it is very politite and fair.
Good article, with good, practical suggestions to explore. Fossil fuel is fungible, and will, eventually run out – maybe not in our lifetimes, but it will run out and the US can either be on the forefront of developing creative, profitable alternative energy sources (we might have already missed that boat if we look at what countries in Europe are already doing). We have gotten fat and lazy in our dependence on fossil fuel. The one sentence that jumped out to me: “Option 3a thru 3c may seem starry-eyed, wild and outside the box. They would require imagination, foresight and courage.” Isn’t this willingness to be brave, creative and outside the box what got us to the moon and Mars; to defeating polio and other horrible diseases; to developing the world’s first assembly lines and computers? Why have we gotten so complacent when it comes to energy? I agree that, if even a small portion of the subsidies and tax breaks Big Oil gets had been directed toward creative activity in alternative sources of energy, we would be, again, at the forefront of something that will be huge in generations to come. Unfortunately, as long as Big Oil owns the government and we are comfortable at our easy access to petroleum products, we will continue to lag behind other more creative societies.
J America leads the world in renewable energy and produces two and half times that of Germany. We are the leaders and are way ahead of the rest of the worl;d. We produce 25 % of renewable energy. Now tell me where America went wrong?
p.s. I am not anti-fossil fuel, BTW. I just filled up at Costco! What I hope I am is pro-creation of a variety of energy sources, with equal amounts of resources put towards research and development of any that are feasible – from both an environmental and profitability point of view.
By the way J your beloved Germany’;s main source of energy is still petroleum. Try 37% . I am sure they can do better. I will stick with America and its high tech ere Silicon Valley and our scientist to provide cleaner and healthier ways to produce crude and deliver crude. We are just getting back into the game and we very shortly will be the biggest producetr and supplier of fossil fuel. I love those two words Fossil Fuel. Americas life blood and for sure our future for better things to come. Bring on fracking big time. It will be safe and healthy.
Joel – you wrote, “Is this really adios, Pilgrim? — or just “I double-dog dare you”? I don’t believe it’s Valero’s style to leave town. It’s not in the corporation’s best interests and shouldn’t be its preferred option.”
Consider:
Valero laid off 500 employees at its refinery in Delaware City, Delaware on November 20, 2009, due to profitability concerns. It was reported the refinery had lost $1 million per day since the beginning of the year. Valero Energy reached an agreement to sell the assets of its terminal operation and discontinue operations in Delaware City to the wholly owned subsidiaries of PBF Energy – Delaware City Refining and Delaware Pipeline – for approximately $220 million in 2010. Shortly after the divestiture of Delaware City, the company sold its refinery at the Port of Paulsboro to PBF Energy, as well. The sale concluded Valero’s refinery ownership on the East Coast. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valero_Energy_Corporation
If Valero sees a need to exit the west coast due to high cost of doing business, they will, and style has nothing to do with it. It’s business.
The Benicia refinery makes motor fuels, jet fuel and diesel fuels. A small fraction of propane may go towards electricity and heating, but most is used by people getting to and from work, around town or on vacation. Jet fuel is used by the major airlines and the military. Diesel is used to get your food from the farm to your local store.
If Valero were to exit the west coast, you can bet the company that might buy the assets will not be
For information only. The Draft EIR report is now scheduled for June 10, 2014. Did the Local Research Reporter Will Gregory know that?