A company known as Exxon Mobil recently agreed to handle their violations of the clean-air law. They agreed to pay a penalty that was a little over two million and they also paid three million on pollution. Some federal officials agree that this will prevent huge amounts of pollution in the future. Others think that this can cause the flaring up of gas, which seems to be a major pollution problem near oil refineries and chemical plants. There were three plants in Louisiana and five in Texas that went through harmful pollution that was released by Exxon. The company violated the Clean Air Act by doing this. Exxon will cut the release of toxic pollutants and try to reduce the release of other chemicals. Fifteen hundred tons of these pollutants
Prior to the year of 1999, Exxon and Mobil were the two largest American oil companies, which were direct descendants of the John D. Rockefeller’s broken up Standard Oil Company. In 1998 Exxon and Mobil signed an eighty billion dollar merger agreement in hope to form Exxon Mobil Corporation, the largest company ever created. Such a merger seems astonishing, not only because it reunited parts of Rockefeller’s Standard Oil Company, but also because it would be extremely difficult for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to approve this merger due to its size and importance in the oil market. In fact, it took the FTC an entire year after the merger was proposed to make a decision due to its rigorous analysis in the product and its geographic market, the concentration of the oil market, the potential anticompetitive effects of the merger, the effects towards their growth and labor force, and lastly, the likelihood of entry and the efficiencies that may affect anticompetitive concerns. Although all of these notions are played a role in the analysis of the merger, it is important to remember that the merger’s result efficiencies did outweigh the the anticompetitive risks that were involved, especially since the oil market was headed towards decreasing prices to expand production.
Exxon/Mobil, one of the nation’s leading oil producers, has its main refinery located in Beaumont, Texas. Each year, the residents of Beaumont/Port Arthur have to contend with the 39,000 pounds of pollution spewed each year by the Exxon refinery. Exxon’s emissions are 385% above the state refinery average. In 1999, the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Committee (TNRCC) allowed the plant to increase their emissions, without allowing the public to have a say in the matter. Interestingly, 95% of the people living near the plant are of African American descent and are in the poverty range. Some believe that this, along with the lack of education in the area, allows Exxon to get away with such high emissions. Residents in nearby neighborhoods have been complaining of headaches, nausea, eye, and throat irritation for years. Since 1997, Mobil has repeatedly violated health standards in its emissions of two key air pollutants: sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, These “rotten egg” smells are so strong, one can smell it through a car driving past the refinery. After numerous complaints and one record of a refinery worker becoming unconscious because of the fumes, the EPA awarded Exxon with a $100,000 environmental justice grant in October of 1998. Hopefully, Exxon has put the money to good use and cleaned up their emissions.
the Environmental Protection Agency ordered General Electric Co. to spend $460 million to dredge PCBs it had dumped into the Hudson River in the past, perhaps the Bush administration's boldest environmental action to date. The decision was bitterly opposed by the company, but hailed by national conservation groups and many prominent and prosperous residents of the picturesque Hudson River Valley.
Smith Jr., Lawrence C., L. Murphy Smith, and Paul A. Ashcroft. "Analysis Of Environmental And Economic Damages From British Petroleum's Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill." Albany Law Review 74.1 (2011): 563-585.Academic Search Complete. Web. 17 Feb. 2014.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates air pollution through various policies passed through the Supreme Court. The scope of this paper is to investigate the Clean Air Act of 1970, and to analyze the impact it has on businesses and society. It provides a rationale for the policy, and contains a brief overview of governmental involvement in regulating air pollution. Further investigation identifies key stakeholders in business, government, and society, and assesses the pros and cons of regulating air pollution. Finally, the paper concludes with limitations of this analysis and recommendations for future action.
... middle of paper ... ... Just look at all the profits that Exxon makes in just one quarter. One could agree from my research it pays to be socially responsible! It was unfortunate for Exxon to have an oil spill, but they got past it, emerging as one of the worlds leading oil and natural gas producers in the world.
Kenneth Schiff wrote an editorial for the Marine Pollution Bulletin in 2014 where he asked environmental scientist about the effectiveness of the Clean Water Act. Three topics were discussed to support their approval; The Cuyahoga River, Platform A and declines in marine life. The Cuyahoga River in Ohio had hit a point 1969 where there was so much oil on the surface of that it caught on fire and now it has been deemed as fishable by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, thanks to the Clean Water Act. Platform A was located in Southern California. In 1969, an explosion occurred, causing 100,000 barrels of oil to devastate beaches along the Pacific Ocean and kill thousands of animals located in this region. Also discussed was the effects of hazardous substances, in this example DDT, on marine life. The use of this pesticide caused brown pelicans and California sea lions to experience intense decline in population- thanks to the Clean Water Act being followed by much research, restrictions and bans were able to be placed on these chemicals, allowing these populations to flourish once more. Within this editorial, there is also many who state that this Act has not been effective enough. One big argument is that the EPA has a list of pollutants that has not changed since the 1970’s yet in the last 40 years, there has
...Waxmann et al. (2011) 750 different chemicals were used by various oil and gas companies during hydraulic fracturing over a four year period, where a minimum of 29 were identified to contain carcinogens which are listed as hazardous on both the clean air and safe drinking water act. The USEPA (2011) suggested that chemicals used during fracking should be monitored according to specific criteria.
The environment and the health of the surrounding population go hand in hand. The Environmental Protection Agency takes on this ever so important mission of protecting them both. The mission statement of the EPA states, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Small Business Programs is to support the protection of human health and the environment by advocating and advancing the business, regulatory, and environmental compliance concerns of small and socio-economically disadvantaged businesses, and minority academic institutions (US Enviromental Protection Agency, 2010).” The impact of its mission can be defined clearly as it examines the impact of contamination in the air, the water, and the land on human health.
1. The United States government and Congress have implemented various legislations in order to hopefully reduce oil spills and aid in the clean up, should an oil spill occur. The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) was signed into legislation in August 1990. The OPA improved the nation's ability to prevent and respond to oil spills by establishing provisions that expand the federal governments's ability, and provide the money and resources necessary, to respond to oil spills. The OPA also created the national Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, which is available to provide up to one billion dollars per spill incident. The OPA also implemented new requirements for contigency planning both by government and industry. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contigency Plan (NCP) has been expanded into a three-tiered approach: the Federal government is required to direct all public and private response efforts for certain types of spill events; Area Committees -- composed of federal, state, and local government officials -- must develop detailed, location-specific Area Contigency Plans; and owners or operators of vessels and certain facilities that pose a serious threat to the environment must prepare their own Facility Response Plans. Finally, the OPA increased penalties for regulatory noncompliance, broadened the response and enforcement authorities of the Federal government, and preserved State authority to establish law governing oil spill prevention and response. Another legislation that was implemented was the Clean Water Act, formerly known as Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which was emplented in 1948. In 1972 the act was reorganized and expanded, adding ammendments and changing it's name to the Clean Water Act(CWA)....
The Chesapeake Bay is polluted with agricultural waste. We see things like 1.5 billion pounds of chicken waste that no one wants to take responsibility for. Ignoring standards, a waterway was tested for E. coli; the standard is 125 FCU/100ml of water. Yet this waterway’s level was at 48392 FCU/100ml. An industry that will go to great lengths to make sure that Congress doesn’t impose sanction against them.
Case Study - Corporate Obstacles to Pollution Prevention. Overview This case focuses on corporate obstacles to pollution prevention. Pollution prevention can be complex, especially for large corporations. There are many different forms of pollution prevention, including emissions control devices and incremental changes in existing technology.
In 1995, an important event marked a victory for the national GreenPeace organization, and for humans alike. The Brent Spar oil installation was not allowed to be dumped into the ocean. The importance of this decision lied in the fact that there were over 600 oil installations that would someday expire just as the Brent Spar had. When the decision was made to not allow the dumping, it set a precident that the other installations would not be allowed to be dumped, either.
In L.A. alone there were 2,700,00 automobiles that were burning 5 ½ million gallons of gasoline and a combine 8,000 tons of contaminants. The automobile companies may not have thought their cars were causing all this damage not only to the city of L.A and to the whole entire country but the APCD (Air Pollution Control District)
If real progress is to be made with this issue, then laws need to be put into place that will limit the polluting of everyone, not just major companies. One way to do this without taking away individual rights, is to tighten emissions standards on motorized vehicles. In the United States, these vehicles account for just about 20% of all emissions. This emits around 24 pounds of carbon dioxide for every gallon of gas(Union of Concerned Scientists, 1). By tightening these standards so that these numbers go down significantly, great progress can be made toward a much more environmentally friendly nation.