The vulnerability of U.S. chemical plants to serious attacks has been widely reported since before Sept. 11.
Unfortunately, since then Congress has only managed to enact a temporary program that will soon expire. That program is so ineffective, it actually exempts thousands of chemical plants and bars the government from requiring the use of security measures that would safeguard communities now at risk.
In September Congress will resume efforts to address this threat on two bills in the Energy and Commerce Committee: The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2009 (H.R. 2868) and the Drinking Water Security System Act of 2009 (H.R. 3258).
Both bills conditionally require the highest risk plants to convert to safer chemical processes where possible. The Obama administration’s leadership will be essential in enacting truly protective legislation.
Once released, poison gases like chlorine can remain dangerous for up to 14 miles in an urban area. According to the EPA, just 300 U.S. chemical plants put over 100 million Americans at risk. Twenty-six of these plants are located in Colorado, each putting approximately 10,000 people at risk.
These facilities were never designed to defend against attacks. In June 2007, DuPont CEO, Charles Holliday admitted, “if someone wants to fly an airplane into a plant, it’s very hard to guard against it.”
The U.S. Naval Research Laboratory estimated that 100,000 people could be killed or injured in the first 30 minutes of such an attack.
In 2007, at least five attacks in Iraq used relatively small cylinders of chlorine gas to kill dozens of people. In 2007, thefts of 150 pound cylinders of chlorine gas occurred in California and Texas, prompting the Department of Homeland Security to alert local bomb squads and chemical plants across the U.S.
The good news is that at least 220 chemical facilities across the country have voluntarily converted to safer chemical processes since 2001 that eliminated risks to millions of people.
More than 87 percent of the plant managers that were interviewed said their conversion costs ranged from less than $100,000 to $1 million or less. A third said they expected to save money.
The legislation that Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette will soon vote on could eliminate these risks to millions more Americans. By requiring the highest risk plants to use already feasible, cost-effective processes they can render their plant harmless and protect surrounding communities.
While chemical giants such as Dow and DuPont field an army of lobbyists to oppose this legislation, the largest shippers of these poison gases have a different point of view.
In 2008 the Association of American Railroads issued a statement saying, “It’s time for the big chemical companies to do their part to help protect America. They should stop manufacturing dangerous chemicals when safer substitutes are available. And if they won’t do it, Congress should do it for them.”
A growing number of political leaders agree. In a March 2006 floor statement in support of this legislation then Sen. Obama said, “…there are other ways to reduce risk that need to be part of the equation. Specifically, by employing safer technologies (IST), we can reduce the attractiveness of chemical plants as a target…Each one of these methods reduces the danger that chemical plants pose to our communities and makes them less appealing targets for terrorists.”
Hopefully, Rep. Diana DeGette will agree and join her colleagues in sending strong legislation to the White House soon. The safety of the American people should not be up for debate.
Diana Best is a climate rescue field organizer for the Rocky Mountain Region Greenpeace. EDITOR’S NOTE: This is an online-only column and has not been edited.
