This Should Obvious But Just in Case: Hurricanes and Oil Country Are a Recipe for Disaster

Meanwhile a key EPA response position remains unfilled.

Workers at a Texas refinery inspect an oil spill after it was flooded by Hurricane Rita.Rick Bowmer/AP

This story was originally published by New Republic and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

In the devastating wake of Hurricane Sandy in 2012, parts of the East Coast were left not only demolished, but polluted. Wastewater treatment plants lost power and discharged 11 billion gallons of sewage into receiving waters. The toxic Gowanus Canal—a Superfund site—flooded and overflowed into people’s homes, covering people and possessions in what one victim called a “greasy, oily slick.” Homeowners’ personal heating oil tanks broke apart and oozed fuel into the soil.

That was Sandy, a Category 1 hurricane. Now, a Category 3 hurricane is heading straight toward Southeast Texas, the heart of the American petrochemical industry. It’s the nightmare situation Roy Scranton warned about in his 2016 op-ed for the New York Times, titled “When the Next Hurricane Hits Texas.” If a storm rips through the region, it will hit an area that includes roughly one third of the country’s known oil and natural gas reserves. And there’s more: “The refineries and plants encircling Galveston Bay are responsible for roughly 25 percent of the United States’s petroleum refining, more than 44 percent of its ethylene production, 40 percent of its specialty chemical feed stock and more than half of its jet fuel.”

A powerful hurricane could disrupt oil and chemical production, Scranton wrote, and in turn domestic and world markets. On Thursday, oil prices were already going haywire as refineries in Corpus Christi shut down ahead of Harvey. That’s a real concern, but it’s not the only reason we should be watching the refineries. There is a huge environmental risk to this storm. If the “biblical event” predicted materializes in this densely packed industrial area, “it may impact the Gulf Coast oil refineries and chemical plants,” said Judith Enck, who served as administrator for EPA’s Region 2 during Hurricane Sandy. “I am extremely concerned about the path of Hurricane Harvey.”

Oil and chemical companies are concerned too. LyondellBassell, one of the largest chemical and refining companies, said in a statement that it is preparing for “potential flooding” of its many Houston-area sites. Anadarko Petroleum and ExxonMobil have started evacuating workers from the region’s offshore oil drilling platforms, which together spilled a total of 741,000 gallons of oil during Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. One analyst told industry publication ICIS that five or six refineriescould be directly hit by the storm.

Environmental advocates are also worried that Harvey will create long-term public health problems due to accidental toxic substance releases, and not just from refineries and power plants. In the 30 counties where a disaster has been declared, there are dozens of Superfund sites, many of which are essentially waste pits containing harmful chemicals. The San Jacinto River Waste Pits, for example, contain carcinogenic dioxins, which are linked to birth defects. Advocates also rightly point out that communities living closest to all these sites—both the Superfunds and the refineries—are disproportionately low-income and minority. “This is an environmental justice issue,” Enck said.

This type of risk is inherent in any major hurricane, especially one that is slated to hit a major population center. But Enck says it is compounded by the fact that President Trump has not appointed an administrator for EPA’s Region 6, which covers both Southeast Texas and Louisiana. “Career staff will do a good job, but this is a situation where real leadership is needed,” Enck said, recalling her own experience. During Sandy, she said, her position was “round the clock.” As the agency works to solve multiple pollution events at once after a storm, “The regional administrator troubleshoots and is the interface with the state environmental agencies, regional staff, and the EPA in Washington,” Enck said. “FEMA is in the lead, but EPA plays a crucial role.”

Fortunately, the acting administrator in EPA’s Region 6 office at the moment appears experienced in responding to natural disasters that result in environmental catastrophe. According to the agency’s website, Samuel Coleman, “guided EPA’s response to Hurricane Katrina as the agency’s senior federal official in New Orleans, leading EPA’s emergency response and recovery missions.” In 2009 Coleman was awarded a Meritorious Presidential Rank Award for his work on Katrina.

This is a stroke of luck for Trump, who has been so preoccupied with the superficial drama of his presidency that he’s barely mentioned the coming storm at all. Hopefully, the communities in the path of Harvey will all be just as lucky. But the future impact of Trump’s dismal policy agenda—which so far has increased the risk of environmental disaster without increasing disaster preparation—gives us something else to worry about. Even if the president can manage on Friday to curb his theatrics and focus on the storm of the decade, it’s unlikely that an environmental disaster will be anywhere near the front of his mind.

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate