Susan Gobreski – 7/26/05

This page was last updated on August 1, 2005.

Special interest bailout; Susan Gobreski; Beaver County Times; July 26, 2005.

An editor’s note accompanying the letter stated, “The writer is eastern field director for the League of Conservation Voters.” It failed to note Ms. Gobreski is also a liberal activist who campaigns for Democrat candidates.

Letters like this reinforce the stereotype of “environmental wackos.” You’ll see what I mean.

Before you read the letter, you need a short primer on MTBE (methyl tertiary butyl ether). As the EPA forced oil companies to stop using lead (tetra ethyl lead) in gasoline during the 1970s, the oil companies had to find a suitable octane enhancing substance to replace lead that would also not foul catalytic converters. Without a means to enhance gasoline’s octane, auto producers would have to produce engines with lower compression ratios. Lower compression ratios have at least two bad side effects, lower power output and higher gasoline consumption. If you remember cars of the mid-1970s to mid-1980s, you know what I mean.

After years of R&D, MTBE turned out to be the best practical alternative to lead to increase octane. The EPA approved MTBE as a fuel additive in 1979. Later, research found that oxygenated additives reduced auto emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. These emissions foster the production of ozone and smog. In the 1990s, the federal government began to require gasoline to contain at least 2.7% oxygenates during winter months. You guessed it, MTBE is an oxygenate. Ethanol is also an oxygenate, but it is much more expensive than MTBE when you take out government ethanol subsidies. Effectively, Congress mandated the use of MTBE because it knew ethanol couldn’t meet price and/or supply requirements.

MTBE started appearing in some water wells. The source was traced to leaking underground fuel tanks. We now know MTBE more easily travels through soil so we need to do a better job of monitoring underground tanks.

During its years of usage, MTBE has allowed us to remove lead from gasoline, increase gas mileage, and decrease auto pollution.

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“It’s outrageous that U.S. Reps. Melissa Hart and Tim Murphy voted last week to bail out the makers of the gasoline additive, MTBE.”

[RWC] As you will learn below, Ms. Gobreski misrepresents the proposal, as I understand it.

“This dangerous chemical has contaminated drinking water supplies here in Pennsylvania. And just the week before, an Environmental Protection Agency draft report called MTBE a likely human carcinogen. The House energy bill shields the makers and refiners of MTBE from product liability, despite the fact that the MTBE industry has knowingly produced and sold this defective product for years.”

[RWC] Of course MTBE is a dangerous chemical, just like nearly every other chemical used in common household products. I can’t be sure, but I don’t think it would be wise for Mr. Gobreski to drink her nail polish or liquid Drano.

Likewise, should we be surprised if MTBE turns out to be a carcinogen? After all, many of the components of gasoline are carcinogens. Further, many of the chemicals in household products are carcinogens. Ms. Gobreski uses this language in an attempt to demonize MTBE. Here’s the full EPA statement on this point: “The majority of the human health-related research conducted to date on MTBE has focused on effects associated with the inhalation of the chemical. When research animals inhaled high concentrations of MTBE, some developed cancers or experienced other non-cancerous health effects To date, independent expert review groups who have assessed MTBE inhalation health risks (e.g., ‘Interagency Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels’) have not concluded that the use of MTBE-oxygenated gasoline poses an imminent threat to public health. However, researchers have limited data about what the health effects may be if a person swallows (ingests) MTBE. EPA’s Office of Water has concluded that available data are not adequate to estimate potential health risks of MTBE at low exposure levels in drinking water but that the data support the conclusion that MTBE is a potential human carcinogen at high doses. Recent work by EPA and other researchers is expected to help determine more precisely the potential for health effects from MTBE in drinking water.”

MTBE is not a “defective product.” I explain below why it’s important for Ms. Gobreski to portray MTBE as a “defective product.”

Ms. Gobreski failed to note the EPA has been aware of MTBE’s potential risk to groundwater almost since the EPA approved MTBE in 1979.

“Now, it wants affected communities and taxpayers to pick up the bill for billions of dollars in cleanup costs.”

[RWC] Not true, as you will read below.

“When given a chance to stand up for taxpayers and public health by urging energy bill conferees to remove the MTBE liability waiver from the bill, Hart and Murphy declined to do so.”

[RWC] Ms. Gobreski is worried about “taxpayers and public health?”

Regarding taxpayers, who will bear the increased cost of alternatives to MTBE?

Regarding public health, Ms. Gobreski apparently forgot the health benefits of MTBE usage, like the removal of lead from gasoline and reduced auto pollution.

“Instead, they sided with MTBE special interests and the ethically challenged Tom DeLay, Congress’ biggest champion of the MTBE bailout provision, leaving taxpayers with the bill to clean up polluted drinking water.”

[RWC] According to the LCV’s own website, Reps. Barton and Bass submitted the proposal, not Rep. DeLay. The attack on Mr. DeLay lays bare the LCV claim not to be “a partisan organization.”

“As the energy bill debate continues, we urge Congress to get rid of this special interest bailout.”

[RWC] I don’t know the details of these proposals so I can’t provide an informed opinion of proposal specifics. I can only comment in general terms.

Here’s what Ms. Gobreski didn’t tell you. The “bailout” Ms. Gobreski is no such thing. Under current law, the polluter pays for spills. As I understand the current proposals, the business/person responsible for a spill would still be liable. For example, if your corner gas station leaks anything – including gasoline containing MTBE – into the environment, the owner of the gas station would pay for the cleanup. Ms. Gobreski and her allies want MTBE classified as a “defective product” so they can sue the makers of MTBE and those companies that mix MTBE into gasoline. If MTBE were not classified as a defective product, the liability for spills would remain where it belongs, with the person responsible for the spill.